UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
AT  LOS  ANGELES 


PRACTICAL    ARGUMENTATION 


PRACTICAL 
ARGUMENTATION 


BY 


GEORGE    K.    PATTER,   A.M. 

Assistant  Professor  of  English  and  Rhetoric  in  The  Pennsylvania 
State  College 


IRevieeD 


NEW   YORK 
THE   CENTURY   CO. 
1920 


Copyright,  1909,  1915,  by 

The  Century  Co. 


Piiblished,  June,  1909 


Revised,  July,  1Q15 


TO 
FRED   LEWIS   PATTEE 


413*"^ 


Preface 

The  revised  edition  of  Practical  Argumentation  is 
the  result  of  a  constant  demand  on  the  part  of  teach- 
ers of  argumentation  and  debate  for  new  supple- 
mentary material  with  which  to  work.  The  author 
has  endeavored  to  satisfy  this  demand  by  making 
a  complete  revision  of  all  class-room  exercises  and 
by  introducing  in  nearly  every  instance  fresh  ma- 
terial to  illustrate  the  various  steps  in  argumenta- 
tive composition.  A  few  illustrations  that  have 
proved  to  be  of  especial  worth  have  been  retained 
from  the  first  edition,  but  all  the  briefs  and  most 
of  the  extracts  from  magazine  articles  and  speeches 
have  not  appeared  before  in  any  text-book.  More- 
over, as  in  the  first  edition,  these  illustrations  have 
been  taken  largely  from  contemporary  and  popular 
sources.  The  models  are  such  that  students  should 
have  no  insuperable  difficulty  in  imitating  them ;  and 
they  have,  furthermore,  been  chosen  with  the  idea 
of  arousing  interest.  The  main  body  of  the  book 
and  its  fundamental  teachings  remain  practically 
unchanged. 


Preface 

One  new  feature  has  been  added.  In  many  col- 
leges there  is  a  growing  desire  to  teach  the  elements 
of  parliamentary  law  along  w^ith  argumentation. 
For  this  reason  the  author  has  inserted  a  chapter 
which  explains  briefly  the  kinds  of  motions  that  may 
come  before  a  deliberative  assembly.  The  table  of 
parliamentary  motions  showing  when  each  motion 
is  in  order,  what  motions  are  debatable,  and  what 
motions  require  a  two-thirds'  vote  to  be  carried, 
should  be  especially  valuable. 

The  purpose  of  this  book  is  to  set  forth  the  prin- 
ciples of  argumentation  in  such  a  way  that  the  in- 
structor will  find  them  teachable  and  the  student 
will  find  them  interesting  and  immediately  helpful. 
The  book  does  not  place  emphasis  primarily  on 
debate;  rather  it  makes  a  general  survey  of  the 
whole  field  of  argument,  both  written  and  spoken. 
Another  aim  of  the  book  is  to  arouse  in  the  stu- 
dents a  desire  for  information  about  the  important 
questions  of  the  day.  This  object  is  accomplished, 
the  author  believes,  by  the  use  of  stimulating  mod- 
els and  a  careful  selection  of  subjects  for  inves- 
tigation. The  student  who  conscientiously  does  the 
work  outlined  should  find  himself  at  the  end  of  the 
course  not  only  tolerant  of  opinions  that  conflict 
with  his  own  but  also  capable  of  arriving  at  con- 
clusions based  on  sound  judgment. 


Preface 

The  author  wishes  to  acknowledge  great  in- 
debtedness to  his  colleagues  in  the  English  depart- 
ment at  The  Pennsylvania  State  College,  to  other 
writers  of  text-books  on  the  same  subject,  and  to 
the  publishing  houses  that  have  generously  per- 
mitted him  to  quote  freely  from  their  files. 


Contents 

PAGE 

I.  Preliminaries 3 

II.  The  Subject 14 

III.  The  Introduction — Persuasion     ...  30 

IV.  '■jk  Introduction — Conviction      ...  48 

V.  The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing     .      .  84 

VI.  The  Discussion — Conviction  and  Persua- 
sion      102 

VII.  The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing  .      .      .  165 

VIII.  Methods  of  Refutation 190 

IX.  Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions      .  228 

X.  The  Conclusion 278 

Appendix. 

A.  A  Written  Argument  and  its  Brief  .      .  290 

B.  Parliamentary  Proceedings      ....  326 

C.  A  List  of  Propositions 340 

Index 351 


PRACTICAL  ARGUMENTA- 
TION 


PRACTICAL   ARGUMENTA- 
TION 

CHAPTER  I 
PRELIMINARIES 

Argumentation  is  the  art  of  presenting  truth  so 
that  others  will  accept  it  and  act  in  accordance  with 
it.  Debate  is  a  special  form  of  argumentation :  it  is 
oral  argumentation  carried  on  by  opposing  sides. 

A  consideration  of  the  service  which  argumenta- 
tion performs  shows  that  it  is  one  of  the  noblest  and 
most  useful  of  arts.  By  argumentation  men  over- 
throw error  and  discover  truth.  Courts  of  law,  de- 
liberative assemblies,  and  all  bodies  of  people  that 
engage  in  discussion  recognize  this  fact.  Argumen- 
tation threshes  out  a  problem  until  the  chaf?  has 
blown  away,  when  it  is  easy  to  see  just  what  kernels 
of  truth  remain  and  what  action  ought  to  be  taken. 
Men  of  affairs,  before  entering  upon  any  great 
enterprise,  call  in  advocates  of  different  systems,  and 

3 


Preliminaries 

by  becoming  familiar  with  arguments  from  every 
point  of  view  try  to  discover  what  is  best.  This 
method  of  procedure  presupposes  a  difference  of 
opinion  and  belief  among  men,  and  holds  that  when 
each  one  tries  to  establish  his  ideas,  the  truth  will 
remain,  and  that  which  is  false  will  be  swept  away. 
The  field  of  argumentation  includes  every  kind  of 
discourse  that  attempts  to  change  man's  actions  or 
opinions.  Exposition  is  explanation  when  only  one 
theory  or  one  interpretation  of  the  facts  is  possible, 
or  when  several  theories  or  several  interpretations 
of  facts  are  explained  impartially;  when  views  of 
truth  or  of  policy  conflict,  and  one  course  is  ex- 
pounded in  opposition  to  another,  the  process  be- 
comes argumentation.  This  art  is  used  not  only  by 
professional  speakers,  but  by  men  of  every  occupa- 
tion. The  schoolboy  pleading  for  a  holiday,  the 
workman  seeking  employment,  the  statesman  advo- 
cating a  principle  of  government  are  all  engaged  in 
some  form  of  argumentation.  Wherever  men  meet 
together,  on  the  street  or  in  the  assembly  hall,  de- 
bate is  certain  to  arise.  Written  argument  is  no 
less  common.  Hardly  a  periodical  is  published  but 
contains  argumentative  writing.  The  fiery  editorial 
that  urges  voters  to  the  polls,  the  calm  and  polisx.^a 
essay  that  points  out  the  dangers  of  organized  labor; 

4 


Preliminaries 

the  scientific  treatise  that  demonstrates  the  prac- 
ticability of  a  sea-level  canal  on  the  Isthmus  are  at- 
tempts to  change  existing  conditions  and  ideas,  and 
thus  come  within  the  field  of  argumentation. 

The  practical  benefit  to  be  derived  from  the  study 
and  application  of  the  principles  of  argumentation 
can  hardly  be  overestimated.  The  man  who  wishes 
to  influence  the  opinions  and  actions  of  others,  who 
wishes  to  become  a  leader  of  men  in  however  great 
or  however  humble  a  sphere,  must  be  familiar  with 
this  art.  The  editor,  the  lawyer,  the  merchant,  the 
contractor,  the  laborer  —  men  in  every  walk  of  life 
—  depend  for  their  success  upon  bringing  others  to 
believe,  in  certain  instances,  as  they  believe.  Every- 
where men  who  can  point  out  what  is  right  and 
best,  and  can  bring  others  to  see  it  and  act  upon 
it,  win  the  day.  Another  benefit  to  be  obtained 
from  the  study  of  argumentation  is  the  capability  of 
being  convinced  intelligently.  The  good  arguer  is 
not  likely  to  be  carried  away  by  specious  arguments 
or  fallacious  reasoning.  He  can  weigh  every  bit  of 
evidence ;  he  can  test  the  strength  and  weakness  of 
every  statement;  he  can  separate  the  essential  from 
the  unessential;  and  he  can  distinguish  between 
^■-^judice  and  reason.  A  master  of  the  art  of  ar- 
gumentation  can  both  present  his  case  convincingly 

5 


Preliminaries 

to  others,  and  discover  the  truth  in  a  matter  that 
is  presented  to  him. 

Argumentation  can  hardly  be  considered  as  a  dis- 
tinct art  standing  by  itself ;  it  is  rather  a  composite 
of  several  arts,  deriving  its  fundamentals  from  them, 
and  depending  upon  them  for  its  existence.  In  the 
first  place,  since  argumentation  is  spoken  or  writ- 
ten discourse,  it  belongs  to  rhetoric,  and  the  rules 
which  govern  composition  apply  to  it  as  strongly 
as  to  any  other  kind  of  expression.  In  fact,  per- 
haps rhetorical  principles  should  be  observed  in 
argumentation  more  rigidly  than  elsewhere,  for  in 
the  case  of  narration,  description,  or  exposition,  the 
reader  or  hearer,  in  an  endeavor  to  derive  pleasure 
or  profit,  is  seeking  the  author,  while  in  argumenta- 
tion it  is  the  author  who  is  trying  to  force  his  ideas 
upon  the  audience.  Hence  an  argument  must  con- 
tain nothing  crude  or  repulsive,  but  must  be  attrac- 
tive in  every  detail.  In  the  second  place,  any  com- 
position that  attempts  to  alter  beliefs  must  deal  with 
reasons,  and  the  science  of  reasoning  is  logic. 
There  is  no  need  for  the  student  of  argumentation 
to  make  an  exhaustive  study  of  this  science,  for 
the  good  arguer  is  not  obliged  to  know  all  the 
different  ways  the  mind  may  work;  he  must,  how- 
ever, know  how  it  should  work  in  order  to  produce 

6 


Preliminaries 

trustworthy  results,  and  to  the  extent  of  teaching 
correct  reasoning,  argumentation  includes  logic.  In 
the  third  place,  a  study  of  the  emotions  belongs  to 
argumentation.  According  to  the  definition,  argu- 
mentation aims  both  at  presenting  truth  and  com- 
pelling action.  As  action  depends  to  a  great  extent 
upon  man's  emotions,  the  way  to  arouse  his  feelings 
and  passions  is  a  fundamental  principle  of  this  art. 
Argumentation,  then,  which  is  commonly  clas- 
sified as  the  fourth  division  of  rhetoric,  consists  of 
two  fundamental  elements.  The  part  that  is  based 
upon  logic  and  depends  for  its  efifectiveness  upon 
pure  reasoning  is  called  conviction;  the  part  that 
consists  of  an  emotional  appeal  to  the  people  ad- 
dressed is  called  persuasion.  If  the  only  purpose  of 
argumentation  were  to  demonstrate  the  truth  or 
falsity  of  a  hypothesis,  conviction  alone  would  be 
sufficient.  But  its  purpose  is  greater  than  this: 
it  aims  both  (i)  to  convince  men  that  certain  ideas 
are  true,  and  also  (2)  to  persuade  them  to  act  in 
accordance  with  the  truth  presented.  Neither  con- 
viction nor  persuasion  can  with  safety  be  omitted. 
An  appeal  to  the  intellect  alone  may  demonstrate 
principles  that  cannot  be  refuted ;  it  may  prove  be- 
yond a  doubt  that  certain  theories  are  logical  and 
right,  and  ought  to  be  accepted.     But  this  sort  of 

7 


Preliminaries 

argument  is  likely  to  leave  the  person  addressed 
cold  and  unmoved  and  unwilling  to  give  up  his 
former  ideas  and  practices.    A  purely  intellectual 
discourse  upon  the  evils  resulting  from  a  high  tariff 
would   scarcely  cause  a  life-long  protectionist  to 
change  his  politics.     If,  however,  some  emotion  such 
as  duty,  public  spirit,  or  patriotism  were  aroused, 
the  desired  action  might  result.     Again  it  frequently 
happens  that  before  the  arguer  can  make  any  appeal 
to  the  logical  faculties  of  those  he  wishes  to  in- 
fluence, he  will  first  have  to  use  persuasion  in  order 
to  gain  their  attention  and  to  arouse  their  interest 
either  in  himself  or  in  his  subject.     On  the  other 
hand,  persuasion  alone  is  undoubtedly  of  even  less 
value  than  conviction  alone.    A  purely  persuasive 
argument  can  never  be  trusted  to  produce  lasting 
effects.     As  soon  as  the  emotions  have  cooled,  if 
no  reasonable  conviction  remains  to  guide  future 
thought  and  action,  the  plea  that  at  first  seemed  so 
powerful  is  likely  to  be  forgotten.     The  preacher 
whose  sermons  are  all  persuasion  may,  for  a  time, 
have   many   converts,   but   it   will   take   something 
besides  emotional  ecstasy  to  keep  them  "  in  good 
and  regular  standing." 

The  proportion  of  conviction  and  persuasion  to 
be  used  in  any  argumentative  effort  depends  entirely 

8 


Preliminaries 

upon  the  attending  circumstances.  If  the  readers 
or  hearers  possess  a  high  degree  of  inteUigence  and 
education,  conviction  should  predominate;  for  it  is 
a  generally  accepted  fact  that  the  higher  man  rises 
in  the  scale  of  civilization,  the  less  he  is  moved  by 
emotion.  A  lawyer's  argument  before  a  judge  con- 
tains little  except  reasoning;  before  a  jury  persua- 
sion plays  an  important  part.  In  the  next  place, 
the  arguer  must  consider  the  attitude  of  those  whom 
he  would  move.  If  they  are  favorably  disposed,  he 
may  devote  most  of  his  time  to  reasoning;  if  they 
are  hostile,  he  must  use  more  persuasion.  Also  the 
correct  proportion  varies  to  some  extent  according 
to  the  amount  of  action  desired.  In  an  intercol- 
legiate debate  where  Httle  or  no  action  is  expected 
to  result,  persuasion  may  almost  be  neglected;  but 
the  political  speech  or  editorial  that  urges  men  to 
follow  its  instructions  usually  contains  at  least  as 
much  persuasion  as  conviction. 

The  aspirant  for  distinction  in  argumentation 
should  study  and  acquire  certain  characteristics  com- 
mon to  all  good  arguers.  First  of  all,  he  should 
strive  to  gain  the  ability  to  analyze.  No  satisfac- 
tory discussion  can  ever  take  place  until  the  contest- 
ants have  picked  the  question  to  pieces  and 
discovered  just  exactly  what  it  means.     The  man 

9 


Preliminaries 

who  does  not  analyze  his  subject  is  likely  to  seize 
upon  ideas  that  are  merely  connected  with  it,  and 
fail  to  find  just  what  is  involved  by  the  question 
as  a  whole.  The  man  skilful  in  argumentation, 
however,  considers  each  word  of  the  proposition  in 
the  light  of  its  definition,  and  only  after  much 
thought  and  study  decides  that  he  has  found  the 
real  meaning  of  the  question.  But  the  work  of 
analysis  does  not  end  here ;  every  bit  of  proof  con- 
nected with  the  case  must  be  analyzed  that  its  value 
and  its  relation  to  the  matter  in  hand  may  be 
determined.  Many  an  argument  is  filled  with  what 
its  author  thought  was  proof,  but  what,  upon  close 
inspection,  turns  out  to  be  mere  assertion  or  falla- 
cious reasoning.  These  errors  are  surpassed  only 
by  the  fault  of  bringing  in  as  proof  that  which  has 
no  direct  bearing  at  all  upon  the  question  at  issue. 
Furthermore,  the  arguer  must  analyze  not  only  his 
own  side  of  the  discussion  but  also  the  work  of  his 
opponent,  so  that  with  a  full  knowledge  of  what  is 
strong  and  what  is  weak  he  may  make  his  attack 
to  the  best  advantage.     Briefly  stated,  the  process  of 

4  analysis  usually  involves  several  distinct  steps:  a 
definition   of   terms,   an   explanation   of   what  the 

^proposition  means  as  a  whole,  and  the  discovery, 
through  an  investigation  of  the  beliefs  of  both  sides 

ID 


Preliminaries 

to  the  controversy,  of  those  points  which  must  be 
estabHshed  or  overthrown  in  order  to  establish  or 
overthrow  the  proposition. 

Next  to  the  abihty  to  analyze,  the  most  important 
qualification  for  an  arguer  to  possess  is  the  faculty 
of  clearly  presenting  his  case.  New  ideas,  new 
truths  are  seldom  readily  accepted,  and  it  is  never 
safe  to  assume  that  the  hearer  or  the  reader  of  an 
argument  will  laboriously  work  his  way  through  a 
mass  of  obscure  reasoning.  Absolute  clearness  of 
expression  is  essential.  The  method  of  arriving  at  a 
conclusion  should  be  so  plain  that  no  one  can  avoid 
seeing  what  is  proved  and  how  it  is  proved. 
Lincoln's  great  success  as  a  debater  was  due  largely 
to  his  clearness  of  presentation.  Especially  in  the 
spoken  argument  must  the  relation  between  ideas 
and  their  bearing  upon  the  subject  be  apparent.  A 
reader  may,  if  he  has  the  patience,  go  over  the  proof 
a  second  time  or  a  third.  But  the  listener  does  not 
have  this  opportunity;  he  must  grasp  the  argument 
as  it  is  delivered  or  not  understand  it  at  all. 

In  the  third  place,  the  person  who  would  control 
his  fellow  men  must  assume  qualities  of  leadership. 
Remembering  that  men  can  be  led,  but  seldom  be 
driven,  he  must  show  his  audience  how  he  himself 
has  reached  certain  conclusions,  and  then  by  leading 

II 


Preliminaries 

them  along  the  same  paths  of  reasoning,  bring  them 
to  the  desired  destination.  If  exhortation,  counsel, 
and  encouragement  are  required,  they  must  be  at 
his  command.  Moreover,  a  leader  who  wishes  to 
attract  followers  must  be  earnest  and  enthusiastic. 
The  least  touch  of  insincerity  or  indifference  will 
ruin  all.  Unless  a  salesman  really  believes  in  his 
goods,  he  seldom  achieves  much  success;  unless  an 
arguer  sincerely  believes  in  his  cause,  he  cannot  make 
a  lasting  impression.  A  brief  study  of  the  history 
of  the  men  who  have  wielded  great  influence  through 
the  spoken  word  will  reveal  that  whatever  may  have 
been  their  failings  they  have  at  least  been  sincere. 
A  hypocrite  cannot  last  long  as  a  leader.  To  ana- 
lyze ideas,  to  present  them  clearly,  and  as  a  leader 
to  enforce  them  enthusiastically  and  sincerely  are 
necessary  qualities  for  every  arguer. 

A  debater  should  possess  additional  attainments. 
He  ought  to  be  a  ready  thinker.  The  disputant 
who  depends  entirely  upon  a  set  speech  is  greatly 
handicapped.  Since  it  is  impossible  to  tell  before- 
hand just  what  arguments  an  opponent  will  use  and 
what  line  of  attack  he  will  pursue,  the  man  who 
cannot  mass  his  forces  to  meet  the  requirements  of 
the  minute  Is  at  great  disadvantage.  Of  course  all 
facts  and  ideas  must  be  mastered  beforehand,  but 

12 


Preliminaries 

unless  one  is  to  be  the  first  speaker,  he  can  most 
effectually  determine  during  the  progress  of  the 
debate  just  what  arguments  are  preferable  and  what 
their  arrangement  should  be.  A  debater  must  also 
have  some  ability  as  a  speaker.  He  need  not  be 
graceful  or  especially  fluent,  though  these  accom- 
plishments are  of  service,  but  he  must  be  forceful. 
Not  only  his  words,  but  also  his  manner  must  reveal 
the  earnestness  and  enthusiasm  he  feels.  His  argu- 
ment, clear,  irrefutable,  and  to  the  point,  should  go 
forth  in  simple,  burning  words  that  enter  into  the 
hearts  and  understanding  of  his  hearers. 


13 


CHAPTER  II 

THE  SUBJECT 

The  subject  of  an  argument  must  always  be  a 
complete  thought.  The  reason  for  this  requirement 
lies  in  the  fact  that  an  argument  can  occur  only 
when  men  have  conflicting  opinions  about  a  certain 
thought,  and  try  to  prove  the  truth  or  falsity  of 
this  definite  idea.  Since  a  term  —  a  word,  phrase, 
or  other  combination  of  words  not  a  complete  sen- 
tence—  suggests  many  ideas,  but  never  stands  for 
one  particular  idea,  it  is  absurd  as  a  subject  to  be 
argued.  A  debatable  subject  is  always  a  proposi- 
tion, a  statement  in  which  something  is  affirmed  or 
denied.  It  would  be  impossible  to  uphold  or  attack 
the  mere  term,  "government  supervision  of  rail- 
roads," for  this  expression  carries  with  it  no  specific 
thought.  It  may  suggest  that  government  super- 
vision of  railroads  has  been  inadequate  in  the  past ; 
or  that  government  supervision  is  at  present  unnec- 
essary; or  that  the  government  is  about  to  assume 
stricter  supervision.     The  term  affords  no  common 

14 


The  Subject 

ground  on  which  the  contestants  would  have  to 
meet.  If,  however,  some  exact  idea  were  expressed 
in  such  a  statement  as,  "  Further  government  super- 
vision of  railroads  is  necessary  for  the  best  interests 
of  the  United  States,"  an  argument  might  well 
follow. 

Although  the  subject  of  an  argument  must  be 
a  complete  thought,  it  does  not  follow  that  this 
proposition  is  always  explicitly  stated  or  formulated 
in  words.  The  same  distinction  between  subject 
and  title  that  exists  in  other  kinds  of  writing  is 
found  also  in  argumentation;  the  subject  is  a  state- 
ment of  the  matter  about  which  the  controversy 
centers ;  the  title  is  the  name  by  which  the  comiposi- 
tion  is  known.  Sometimes  the  subject  serves  as 
the  title,  and  sometimes  the  subject  is  left  to  be 
discovered  in  the  body  of  the  work.  The  title  of 
the  speech  delivered  by  Webster  in  the  Senate, 
January  26,  1830,  is  "  Webster's  Reply  to  Hayne  " ; 
the  subject,  in  the  form  of  a  resolution,  is  found 
close  to  the  opening  sentences : 

y  Resolved,  That  the  Committee  on  Public  Lands  be  in- 
structed to  inquire  and  report  the  quantity  of  public  lands 
remaining  unsold  within  each  State  and  Territory,  and 
whether  it  be  expedient  to  limit  for  a  certain  period  the  sales 
of  the  public  lands  to  such  lands  only  as  have  heretofore 
been  offered  for  sale,  and  are  now  subject  to  entry  at  the 

15 


The  Subject 


minimum  price.  And,  also,  whether  the  office  of  Surveyor- 
General,  and  some  of  the  land  offices,  may  not  be  abolished 
without  detriment  to  the  public  interest;  or  whether  it  be 
expedient  to  adopt  measures  to  hasten  the  sales  and  extend 
more  rapidly  the  surveys  of  the  public  lands. 

The  thirteen  resolutions  offered  by  Burke  form 
the  subject  of  the  argument  known  by  the  title, 
"  Burke's  Speech  on  Conciliation  with  America." 
An  issue  of  the  Outlook  contains  an  article  en- 
titled "  Russian  Despotism  " ;  careful  reading  dis- 
closes that  the  subject  is  this,  "  The  Present  Gov- 
ernment of  Russia  Has  No  Right  to  Exist."  In 
legislative  proceedings  the  subject  of  argument  is 
found  in  the  form  of  a  bill,  or  a  motion,  or  a 
resolution ;  in  law  courts  it  is  embodied  in  statements 
called  "  pleadings,"  which  "  set  forth  with  certainty 
and  with  truth  the  matters  of  fact  or  of  law,  the 
truth  or  falsity  of  which  must  be  decided  to  decide 
the  case."  ^  In  college  debate  it  is  customary  to 
frame  the  subject  in  the  form  of  a  resolution,  and 
to  use  this  resolution  as  the  title.  The  generally 
accepted  form  is  as  follows: 

Resolved,  That  the  United  States  army  should  be 
increased  to  one  million  men. 

Notice  the  use  of  italics,  of  punctuation  marks, 
and  of  capital  letters. 

1  Laycock  and  Scales'  Argumentation  and  Debate,  page  14. 
16 


The  Subject 

In  all  kinds  of  argumentation,  whether  the  prop- 
osition to  be  discussed  is  clearly  expressed  or  not, 
the  arguer  must  keep  his  subject  constantly  in 
mind,  that  his  efforts  may  all  be  directed  toward 
a  definite  end  in  view  —  to  convince  and  persuade 
his  audience.  In  debate  the  speaker  should  plainly 
state  the  subject,  and  constantly  hold  it  up  to  the 
attention  of  the  audience.  This  procedure  renders 
it  impossible  for  an  opponent  to  ignore  the  question 
and  evade  the  real  issue. 


HOW  TO  FIND  A  SUBJECT 

Only  those  who  are  debating  for  practice  expe- 
rience any  difficulty  in  obtaining  a  subject.  In  the 
business  world  men  argue  because  they  are  con- 
fronted with  some  perplexing  problem,  because 
some  issue  arises  that  demands  discussion;  but  the 
student,  generally  speaking,  chooses  his  own  topic. 
Therefore  a  few  suggestions  in  regard  to  the  choice 
of  a  subject  and  the  wording  of  a  proposition  are 
likely  to  be  of  considerable  service  to  him. 

The  student  should  first  select  some  general,  pop- 
ular topic  of  the  day  in  which  he  is  interested.  He 
should,  for  several  reasons,  not  the  least  of  which 
is  that  he  will  thus  gain  considerable  information 

17 


The  Subject 

that  may  be  of  value  to  him  outside  the  class-room, 
select  a  timely  topic  rather  than  one  that  has  been 
worn  out  or  that  is  comparatively  unknown.  He 
should,  moreover,  choose  an  interesting-  topic,  for 
then  his  work  will  be  more  agreeable  and  conse- 
quently of  a  higher  order.  Of  this  general  idea 
he  must  decide  upon  some  specific  phase  which 
readily  lends  itself  to  discussion.  Then  he  has  to 
express  this  specific  idea  in  the  form  of  a  prop- 
osition. 


HOW  TO  WORD  A  PROPOSITION 

1.  As  it  is  not  an  easy  matter  to  state  a  proposition 
with  precision  and  fairness,  one  must  always  care- 
fully choose  the  exact  words  that  denote  the  precise 
meaning  he  wishes  to  convey.  Many  writers  and 
speakers  have  found  themselves  in  false  positions 
just  because,  upon  examination,  it  was  found  that 
their  subjects  were  ambiguous  or  did  not  present  the 
idea  intended.  Only  a  careful  study  of  the  mean- 
ings of  words  supplemented  by  the  exercise  of  sound 
judgment  will  produce  satisfactory  results. 

2.  ]\Ioreover,  in  phrasing  the  proposition,  the  de- 
bater should  so  state  the  subject  that  the  affirmative 
^de,  the  side  that  opens  the  discussion,  is  the  one  to 


The  Subject 

advocate  a  change  in  existing  conditions  or  belief. 
This  method  obviously  correspondslo'tKe  wayln 
which  business  is  conducted  in  practical  affairs.  No 
one  has  reason  to  defend  an  established  condition 
until  it  is  first  attacked.  The  law  presumes  a  man 
to  be  innocent  until  he  is  proved  guilty,  and  there- 
fore it  is  the  prosecution,  the  side  to  affirm  guilt, 
that  opens  the  case.  The  question  about  govern- 
ment ownership  of  railroads  should  be  so  worded 
that  the  affirmative  side  will  advocate  the  new 
system,  and  the  negative  will  uphold  the  old.  It 
should  be  stated  thus:  "Resolved,  That  all  rail- 
roads in  the  United  States  should  be  owned  and 
operated  by  the  Federal  government."  This  ob- 
ligation of  adducing  evidence  and  reasoning  to 
support  one  side  of  a  proposition  before  an  answer 
from  the  other  side  can  be  demanded,  is  called 
burden  of  proof.  The  "  burden  "  always  rests  upon 
the  side  that  advocates  a  change,  and  the  proposition 
should  be  so  worded  that  the  affirmative  will  have  to 
undertake  this  duty. 

3.  One  more  principle  must  be  observed :  nothing 
jn  the  wording  of  the  subject  <^hnn1d_pnvp  nnp  side 
any  advantage_oyer  the  other.  Argument  can  exist 
only  when  reasonable  men  have  a  difference  of  opin- 
ion.    If  the  wording  of  the  proposition  removes  this 

19 


The  Subject 

difference,  no  discussion  can  ensue.  For  instance, 
the  word  "  undesirable,"  if  allowed  to  stand  in  the 
following  proposition,  precludes  any  debate :  ''  Re- 
solved, That  all  colleges  should  abolish  the  un- 
desirable game  of  football." 

From  the  preceding  suggestions  it  is  seen  that 
the  subject  of  an  argument  is  a  definite,  restricted 
thought  derived  from  some  general  idea.  Whether 
expressed  or  not,  the  subject  must  be  a  proposition, 
not  a  term.  In  debate  the  proposition  is  usually 
framed  in  the  form  of  a  resolution.  This  resolution 
must  always  be  so  worded  that  the  burden  of  proof 
will  rest  upon  the  affirmative  side.  Nothing  in  the 
wording  of  the  proposition  should  give  either  side 
any  advantage  over  the  other.  These  principles 
have  to  do  with  the  manner  of  expression;  subjects 
will  next  be  considered  with  respect  to  the  ideas 
they  contain. 

KINDS  OF  PROPOSITIONS 

A  common  and  convenient  method  of  classifica- 
tion divides  propositions  into  two  groups;  proposi- 
tions of  policy,  and  propositions  of  fact.  The  first 
class  consists  of  those  propositions  that  aim  to  prove 
the  truth  of  a  theory,  that  indicate  a  preference  for 

20 


The  Subject 

a  certain  policy,  for  a  certain  method  of  action. 
The  second  class  comprises  those  propositions  that 
affirm  or  deny  the  occurrence  of  an  event,  or  the 
existence  of  a  fact.  Propositions  of  policy  usually, 
though  not  always,  contain  the  word  should  op 
ought;  propositions  of  fact  usually  contain  some 
form  of  the  word  to  be.  As  a  rule,  only  one  kind  of 
proposition  is  at  all  hard  to  classify.  At  first  glance 
it  m.ay  seem  that  the  proposition,  "  The  commission 
form  of  city  government  is  superior  to  the  mayor 
and  council  system,"  is  a  proposition  of  fact;  it  is, 
however,  a  proposition  of  policy.  Such  a  subject 
gives  rise  to  a  weighing  of  values,  a  contrasting  of 
policies,  and  the  argument  would  not  be  essentially 
different  if  the  proposition  were  worded  in  what  is 
obviously  a  proposition  of  policy,  "  American  cities 
should  adopt  the  commission  form  of  government." 
The  following  illustrations  will  make  plainer  the 
differences  between  propositions  of  policy  and  prop- 
ositions of  fact : 

PROPOSITIONS  OF  POLICY 

The  right  of  suffrage  should  be  limited  to  per- 
sons who  can  read  and  write. 

Athletics  as  conducted  at  present  are  detrimental 
to  American  colleges. 

21 


The  Subject 


The  powers  of  the  Interstate  Commerce  Com- 
mission should  be  curtailed. 

The  single  tax  as  advocated  by  Henry  George 
would  be  an  improvement  over  our  present  method 
of  taxation. 

PROPOSITIONS  OF  FACT 

Russia  was  responsible  for  the  outbreak  of  the 
European  War  in  1914. 

Bacon  wrote  the  plays  commonly  attributed  to 
Shakespeare. 

Swift  was  married  to  Stella. 

PROPOSITIONS  TO  BE  AVOIDED 

The  most  convenient  method  of  studying  proposi- 
tions to  see  further  what  subjects  are  desirable  for 
student  debates  is  to  consider  those  propositions  that 
should  be  avoided. 

I.  Propositions  v^th  only  one  side.  Since  ar- 
gumentation presupposes  a  difference  of  opinion 
about  a  certain  subject,  it  is  obviously  impossible 
to  argue  upon  a  subject  on  which  all  are  agreed. 
Sometimes  such  propositions  as,  ''Resolved,  That 
Garibaldi  was  a  great  patriot,"  and  ''  Resolved,  That 
the  public  press  exerts  a  great  influence  on  political 

22 


The  Subject 

conditions  in  the  United  States,"  are  found  on  the 
programs  of  literary  societies  and  debating  clubs. 
In  such  cases  mere  comment,  not  debate,  can  follow. 
Only  subjects  on  which  reasonable  men  actually  dis- 
agree are  suitable  for  argument. 

2.  Ambiguous  propositions.  If  a  proposition 
is  capable  of  several  interpretations,  those  who 
choose  it  as  a  subject  for  an  argument  are  liable  not 
to  agree  on  what  it  means,  and  one  side  will  debate 
in  accordance  with  one  interpretation,  and  the  other 
side  in  accordance  with  a  totally  different  interpre- 
tation. Thus  the  opponents  will  never  meet  in  con- 
flict except  when  they  explain  their  subject.  For 
example,  in  a  certain  debate  on  the  question,  "Re- 
solved, That  American  colleges  should  abolish  ex- 
aminations," the  affirmative  held  that  only  final  ex- 
aminations were  involved ;  while  the  negative  main- 
tained that  the  term  "  examinations  "  included  not 
only  final  but  also  monthly  and  even  oral  examina- 
tions. Manifestly  the  debate  hinged  largely  on  the 
definition  of  this  term ;  but  as  there  was  no  authority 
to  settle  just  what  was  meant,  the  debate  was  a 
failure.  It  is  usually  desirable,  and  frequently 
necessary,  to  explain  what  the  subject  means,  for  un- 
less it  has  some  meaning  which  both  sides  are  bound 
to  accept,  the  argument  becomes  a  mere  controversy 

23 


The  Subject 

over  the  definition  of  words.  Another  ambiguous 
proposition  would  be,  "  Republican  government  is 
preferable  to  any  other  kind  of  government  in  the 
United  States."  The  word  "  republican  "  is  open 
to  two  legitimate  definitions,  and  since  the  context 
does  not  explain  which  meaning  is  intended,  a  de- 
bater is  at  liberty  to  accept  either  definition  that  he 
wishes.  A  few  alterations  easily  turn  this  propo- 
sition into  a  debatable  subject,  ''  Government  by  the 
Republican  Party  best  promotes  the  prosperity  of 
the  United  States." 

3.  Too  general  propositions.  It  is  never  wise 
for  a  writer  or  a  speaker  to  choose  a  subject  which 
is  so  general  or  so  abstract  that  he  cannot  handle 
it  with  some  degree  of  completeness  and  facility. 
Not  only  will  such  work  be  difficult  and  distasteful 
to  him,  but  it  will  be  equally  distasteful  and  un- 
interesting to  his  audience.  No  student  can  write 
good  themes  on  such  subjects  as,  "  Socialism,"  "  Cul- 
ture," "  Subsidies  " ;  nor  can  he  argue  well  on  prop- 
ositions like,  "Resolved,  That  socialism  is  imprac- 
ticable " ;  ""  Resolved,  That  a  cultural  education  is 
superior  to  a  technical  education  " ;  or  "  Resolved, 
That  subsidies  are  undemocratic."  These  are  en- 
tirely beyond  his  scope ;  they  are  propositions  that 
cannot  be  either  proved  or  disproved  satisfactorily. 

24 


The  Subject 

But  a  college  student  can  handle  restricted  proposi- 
tions that  have  to  do  with  some  one  phase  of  some 
concrete,  tangible  event  or  idea,  such  as,  ''  Resolved, 
That  at  the  next  national  election  the  Socialist  ticket 
should  be  supported  " ;  '"  Resolved,  That Col- 
lege should  offer  an  undergraduate  course  in  the  his- 
tory of  the  art  of  painting";  ''Resolved,  That  the 
United  States  should  subsidize  its  merchant  marine." 
4.  Combined  propositions.  It  sometimes  hap- 
pens that  several  heterogeneous  ideas,  each  of  which 
by  itself  would  form  an  excellent  subject  for  argu- 
ment, are  embodied  in  a  single  proposition.  The 
difficulty  of  arguing  on  this  kind  of  subject  is  ap- 
parent. It  is  none  too  easy  to  establish  one  idea 
satisfactorily;  but  when  several  ideas  must  be  up- 
held and  defended,  the  work  is  enormous  and  some- 
times open  to  the  charge  of  inconsistency.  More- 
over, the  principle  of  Unity  demands  that  a 
composition  be  about  a  single  topic.  The  proposi- 
tion, ''Resolved,  That  Aaron  Burr  w^as  guilty  of 
murder  and  should  have  been  put  to  death,"  involves 
two  debatable  subjects,  each  of  which  is  of  sufficient 
importance  to  stand  in  a  proposition  by  itself: 
"Was  Burr  guilty  of  murder?"  and  "Should  a 
murderer  be  punished  by  death?"  The  error  of 
combining  in  a  compound  sentence  several  distinct 

25 


The  Subject 

subjects  for  debate  is  generally  detected  with  ease; 
but  when  the  error  of  combination  exists  in  a  simple 
sentence  it  is  not  always  so  obvious.  In  the  sub- 
ject, ''  Resolved,  That  foreign  immigrants  have  been 
unjustly  treated  by  the  United  States,"  there  are,  as 
the  same  privileges  have  not  been  granted  all  immi- 
grants, several  debatable  questions.  One  who  at- 
tempts to  argue  on  this  subject  must  take  into  con- 
sideration the  treatment  that  has  been  accorded  the 
Chinese,  the  English,  the  Germans,  the  Italians,  the 
paupers,  the  well-to-do,  and  others.  In  one  case  the 
laws  may  be  palpably  unfair,  and  in  another  case, 
all  that  can  be  desired. 

When  two  ideas,  however,  are  very  closely  related 
and  are  dependent  upon  each  other  for  interpreta- 
tion and  support,  they  may  and  sometimes  should 
be  combined  in  the  same  proposition.  For  example, 
"  Education  should  be  compulsory  to  the  age  of  six- 
teen," involves  two  main  issues :  "  Education  should 
be  compulsory,"  and  "  The  age  of  sixteen  is  the 
proper  limit."  But  in  this  case  the  one  who  advo- 
cates compulsory  education  is  under  obligation  to 
explain  some  definite  system,  and  this  explanation 
must  include  the  establishing  of  some  limit.  To 
name  this  limit  in  the  proposition  renders  the  ar- 
gument clearer  to  an   audience  and   fairer  to  an 

26 


The  Subject 

opponent.  For  similar  reasons,  the  proposition, 
"  The  Federal  government  should  own  and  operate 
the  railroads  in  the  United  States,"  cannot  be  con- 
demned on  the  ground  that  it  is  a  proposition  with 
more  than  one  main  idea. 

Propositions,  then,  adapted  to  class-room  argu- 
ment, are  those  which  give  rise  to  a  conflict  of 
opinion;  which  contain  a  definite  and  unmistakable 
thought ;  which  are  specific  and  sufficiently  restricted 
to  admit  of  thorough  treatment ;  and  which  contain 
a  single  idea. 

Furthermore,  the  student  will  do  well  to  select 
subjects  that  are  as  nearly  as  possible  like  the 
problems  which  statesmen,  educators,  professional 
and  business  men  meet  in  practical  life.  He  should 
try  to  remove  his  argument  as  far  as  he  can  from 
the  realm  of  pure  academic  exercise,  and  endeavor 
to  gain  some  insight  into  the  issues  that  are  now 
confronting  the  makers  of  modern  civilization.  The 
student  who  takes  this  work  seriously  is  sure  to  gain 
information,  form  opinions,  and  acquire  habits  of 
thought  that  will  be  of  great  practical  value  to  him 
when  he  takes  his  place  as  a  man  among  men. 

EXERCISES 

A.  Narrow  each  of  the  followmg  terms  into  good,  de- 
batable propositions : 


The  Subject 


Panama  Canal  tolls ;  national  expositions ;  libel  laws ;  In- 
terstate Commerce  Commission;  regional  banks;  world 
peace;  pork  barrel  legislation;  divorce  laws;  national  pro- 
hibition; intensive  agriculture;  newspaper  advertising;  tech- 
nical education;  state  highways;  railroad  electrification; 
compulsory  arbitration;  wages;  employers'  liability;  re- 
bates; rural  free  delivery;  direct  primaries;  standing  army; 
bo3^cott;  inland  water  ways;  denominational  colleges;  dra- 
matic censorship. 

B.    Criticize  the  following  propositions: 

1.  The  Bible  has  exerted  a  strong  influence  on  English 
literature. 

2.  The  automobile  is  more  useful  than  the  horse. 

3.  Strikes  are  beneficial  to  legislation. 

4.  United  States  Senators  should  be  elected  by  popular 
vote. 

5.  Athletic  sports  benefit  college  students. 

6.  All  cities  in  the  United  States  having  at  least  ten  thou- 
sand inhabitants  should  adopt  the  highly  desirable  commis- 
sion form  of  government. 

7.  Travel  is  a  luxury. 

8.  The  Federal  government  should  establish  a  parcels 
post. 

9.  Patrick  Henry  was  a  great  orator. 

10.  The  Federal  government  should  own  and  operate  the 
telegraph  systems  in  the  country  and  exercise  a  strict  su- 
pervision over  the  issuing  of  railroad  securities. 

11.  Luxurious  living  is  to  be  condemned. 

12.  Congress  should  repeal  the  unjust  Fifteenth  Amend- 
ment. 

13.  Evolution  is  not  consistent  with  the  Bible. 

14.  The  Slav  is  inferior  to  the  Teuton. 

15.  Undesirable  immigrants  should  not  be  admitted  into 
the  United  States. 

28 


The  Subject 


16.  The  parcels  post  is  of  greater  benefit  to  the  people  of 
the  United  States  than  the  rural  free  delivery  of  mail. 

17.  Foreign   acquisitions   have  been  a  detriment  to  the 
United  States. 

18.  A  forest  reserve  should  be  established  in  the  White 
Mountains. 

19.  A  two-thirds  vote  of  a  jury  should  constitute  a  verdict 
in  civil  and  criminal  cases. 

20.  The  United   States  should  not  estal)lish  commercial 
reciprocity  with  Canada. 


29 


CHAPTER  III 
THE  INTRODUCTION  — PERSUASION 

Every  complete  argument  consists  of  three  parts : 
introduction,  discussion,  and  conclusion.  Each  of 
these  divisions  has  definite  and  specific  duties  to 
perform.  The  work  of  the  introduction  is  three- 
fold: (i)  to  concihate  the  audience;  (2)  to  explain 
the  subject;  and  (3)  to  outline  the  discussion.  As 
the  conciliation  of  the  audience  is  accomplished  by 
an  appeal  to  the  emotions  rather  than  to  the  reason, 
it  is  properly  classified  under  persuasion.  Explain- 
ing the  proposition  and  outlining  the  discussion  are 
of  an  expository  nature  and  will  be  discussed  under 
the  head  of  conviction. 

As  has  been  stated  in  a  previous  chapter,  the 
amount  of  persuasion  to  be  used  in  any  piece  of 
argumentative  work  depends  entirely  upon  the  at- 
tending circumstances.  The  subject,  audience, 
author,  occasion,  and  purpose  of  the  effort  must  be 
taken  into  consideration.  But  whether  the  amount 
used  be  great  or  small,  practically  every  argument 

30 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

should  begin  with  conciHation.  The  conciHation  of 
the  audience  —  the  word  audience  is  used  through- 
out this  book  to  designate  both  hearers  and  readers 
—  consists  of  gaining  the  good  will  of  those  to  be 
convinced,  of  arousing  their  interest,  and  of  render- 
ing them  open  to  conviction.  No  argument  can  be 
expected  to  attain  any  considerable  degree  of  suc- 
cess so  long  as  anything  about  its  author,  or  anything 
in  the  subject  itself,  is  peculiarly  disagreeable  to  the 
people  it  is  designed  to  affect.  If  the  ill  will  re- 
mains too  great,  it  is  not  likely  that  the  argument 
will  ever  reach  those  for  whom  it  is  intended,  much 
less  produce  the  desired  result.  In  addressing 
Southern  sympathizers  at  Liverpool,  during  the 
Civil  War,  Beecher  had  to  fight  even  for  a  hearing. 
The  speech  of  an  unpopular  Senator  frequently 
empties  the  Senate  chamber.  Men  of  one  political 
belief  often  refuse  to  read  the  publications  of  the 
opposite  party.  Obviously,  the  first  duty  of  the 
introduction  is  to  gain  the  approval  of  the  audience. 
In  the  next  place,  interest  must  be  aroused.  Active 
dislike  is  less  frequently  encountered  than  indiffer- 
ence. How  many  times  sermons,  lectures,  books 
have  failed  in  their  object  just  because  no  one  took 
any  interest  in  them !  There  was  no  opposition,  no 
hostility;  every  one  wished  the  cause  well;  and  yet 

31 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

the  effort  failed  to  meet  with  any  attention  or  re- 
sponse. The  argument  did  not  arouse  interest  — 
and  interest  is  a  prime  cause  of  attention  and  of 
action.  In  the  third  place,  the  conciliator)'  part  of 
the  introduction  should  induce  the  audience  to  as- 
sume an  unbiased,  judicial  attitude,  ready  to  decide 
the  question  according  to  the  strength  of  the  proof. 
This  result  is  not  always  easy  of  attainment.  Long- 
standing beliefs,  prejudice,  stubbornness  must  be 
overcome,  and  a  desire  for  the  truth  substituted  for 
everything  else.  All  this  is  frequently  difficult,  but 
unless  an  arguer  can  gain  the  good  will  of  the  people 
addressed,  arouse  their  interest,  and  render  them 
willing  to  be  convinced,  no  amount  of  reasoning  is 
likely  to  produce  much  effect. 

Now  the  question  arises.  How  is  it  possible  to 
conciliate  the  audience?  To  this  query  there  is  no 
answer  that  will  positively  guarantee  success.  The 
arguer  must  always  study  his  audience  and  suit  his 
discourse  to  the  occasion.  What  means  success  in 
one  instance  may  bring  failure  in  another.  The 
secret  of  the  whole  matter  is  adaptability.  Humor, 
gravity,  pathos,  even  defiance  may  at  times  be  used 
to  advantage.  It  is  not  always  possible,  however, 
for  the  orator  or  writer  to  know  beforehand  just 
the  kind  of  people  he  is  to  address.     In  this  case 

32 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

it  is  usually  best  for  him  to  follow  out  a  few  well 
established  principles  that  most  arguers  have  found 
to  be  of  benefit. 

y^       ATTITUDE  OF  ARGUER 

Modesty.  Modesty  in  word  and  action  is  in- 
dispensable to  one  who  would  gain  the  friendship  of 
his  audience.  Anything  that  savors  of  egotism  at 
once  creates  a  feeling  of  enmity.  No  one  can  en- 
dure another's  consciousness  of  superiority  even 
though  the  superiority  be  real.  An  appearance  of 
haughtiness,  self-esteem,  condescension,  intolerance 
of  inferiors,  or  a  desire  for  personal  glory  will  at 
once  raise  barriers  of  dislike.  On  the  other  hand, 
modesty  should  never  be  carried  so  far  as  to  become 
affectation  ;  that  attitude  is  equally  despicable.  Per- 
sonal unobtrusiveness  should  exist  without  being 
conspicuous.  The  arguer  should  always  take  the 
attitude  that  the  cause  he  is  upholding  is  greater 
than  its  advocate.    ^ 

In  the  following  quotations,  compare  the  over- 
bearing arrogance  of  the  first  selection  with  the  sim- 
ple modesty  of  the  second : 

(a)  The  circumstances  surrounding  the  matter  upon 
which  we  deliberate  are,  perhaps,  better  known  to  me  than 
to  any  other  living  being.    I  have  investigated  fullj-  and 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

discriminatingly.  I  have  applied  the  ripe  judgment  of  ma- 
ture years  to  the  solving  of  this  problem.  I  have  arrived 
at  conclusions  that  are  incontrovertable. 

(b)  Unused  to  occasions  like  the  present,  and  without 
any  practice,  otlier  than  forensic,  I  find  myself,  unadvisedly, 
engaged  in  deliberative  debate,  where  notliing  is  worthy  of 
attention  unless  most  valuable  in  material  and  in  detail 
most  finished.  If  I  could  now  fairly  retreat,  it  would  be 
impossible  for  me  to  proceed.  Abandoning  myself,  there- 
fore, to  your  candor,  sir,  and  that  of  the  House,  I  will 
look  to  the  question  for  that  support  which  a  great  ques- 
tion never  fails  to  afford. 

Fairness.  Few  things  will  assist  an  arguer  more 
in  securing  a  respectful  hearing  from  those  who  do 
not  agree  with  him,  but  whom  he  would  convince, 
than  the  quality  of  fairness.  The  arguer  should 
take  the  position  of  one  seeking  the  truth  regardless 
of  what  it  may  be.  If  he  wishes  others  to  look  at 
the  question  from  his  standpoint,  he  will  have  to 
show  that  he  is  willing  to  consider  the  question  from 
their  point  of  view.  Ever}^thing  in  the  shape  of 
prejudice,  everything  which  would  tend  to  indicate 
that  he  had  formed  conclusions  prior  to  his  investi- 
gation, he  must  carefully  avoid,- 

In  this  connection  consider  the  following: 

Is  the  Stock  Exchange,  as  has  been  said  even  by  a  prom- 
inent writer  on  economics,  a  "gambling  hell "?  Is  it  an  in- 
stitution which,  perhaps,  we  ought  to  suppress?  Let  us 
look  at  these  questions  in  the  light  of  what  the  Stock  Ex- 
change really  is  and  does.     Let  us  approach  the  subject  with 

34 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

an  open  mind  and  an  inquiring  eye  and  see  what  light  an 
examination  of  the  facts  throws  upon  the  duty  of  the  Stock 
Exchange  to  the  public  and  of  the  public  in  relation  to  the 
Stock  Exchange.  Heat  is  an  admirable  thing  in  its  place, 
but  it  never  yet  has  been  made  to  do  the  work  of  light.^ 

Sincerity.  Another  quality  of  paramount  im- 
portance to  the  arguer  is  sincerity.  This  he  must 
really  possess  if  he  is  to  be  eminently  successful. 
To  feign-  it  is  almost  impossible ;  some  word  or  ex- 
pression, some  gesture  or  inflection  of  the  voice, 
the  very  attitude  of  the  insincere  arguer  will  betray 
his  real  feelings.  If  he  tries  to  arouse  an  emotion 
that  he  himself  does  not  feel,  his  affectation  will  be 
apparent  and  his  effort  a  failure.  There  are  few 
things  that  an  audience  resents  more  than  being 
tricked  into  an  expression  of  feeling.  If  they  even 
mistrust  that  a  speaker  is  trying  to  deceive  them, 
that  he  is  arguing  merely  for  personal  gain  or  repu- 
tation and  has  no  other  interest  in  the  case,  no  de- 
sire to  establish  the  truth,  they  will  not  only  with- 
hold their  confidence,  but  will  also  become  preju- 
diced against  him.  It  is  really  inviting  disaster  to 
champion  a  cause  in  which  one  is  not  interested 
heart  and  soul.  Of  course  in  class-room  work  the 
student  cannot  always  avoid  taking  a  false  position, 
and  the  training  he  receives  thereby  is  excellent,  but 

1  Outlook,  104:419. 

35 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

he  cannot  make  his  persuasion  of  the  highest  type 
of  effectiveness  unless  he  honestly  and  sincerely  be- 
lieves what  he  says,  and  feels  the  emotions  he  would 
arouse. 

1  am  persuaded,  Mr.  Chairman,  that  I  in  my  turn  shall  be 
indulged  in  addressing  the  committee.  We  all  in  equal  sin- 
cerity profess  to  be  anxious  for  the  establishment  of  a  re- 
publican government  on  a  safe  and  solid  basis.  It  is  the 
object  of  the  wishes  of  every  honest  man  in  the  United 
States,  and  I  presume  that  I  shall  not  be  disbelieved  when 
I  declare  that  it  is  an  object  of  all  others  the  nearest  and 
most  dear  to  my  own  heart.  The  means  of  accomplishing 
this  great  purpose  become  the  most  important  study  which 
can  interest  mankind.  It  is  our  duty  to  examine  all  those 
means  with  peculiar  attention  and  to  choose  the  best  and 
most  effectual.- 

HOW  TO  AROUSE  INTEREST 

I.  Importance  of  the  subject.  Specific  directions 
for  arousing  interest  are  hard  to  give.  The  appeal 
must  suit  both  the  audience  and  the  occasion,  and 
until  these  are  known  suggestions  must  be  of  a  some- 
what general  character.  One  of  the  commonest 
methods,  however,  of  arousing  an  audience  apathetic 
and  indifferent  is  to  impress  upon  them  the  im- 
portance and  gravity  of  the  question  at  issue.  Mat-  • 
ters  thought  to  be  trivial  are  apt  to  receive  scant  at- 

2  Alexander  Hamilton,  June  24,  1788,  in  the  New  York  Convention,  ^j 
called  to  ratify  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

36 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

tention.  This  fact  is  so  universally  recognized  that 
many  writers  and  speakers  attempt  at  the  very  outset 
fto  show  that  upon  the  correct  solution  of  the  prob- 
l  lem  at  hand  depend  serious  and  far-reaching  results. 
It  is  seldom  enough  merely  to  state  that  a  subject  is 
important ;  its  seriousness  should  be  made  apparent. 
This  method  is  very  popular.  Whenever  one  feels 
it  necessary  to  open  an  argument  with  persuasion, 
but  is  at  a  loss  to  know  how  to  do  so,  he  may  well 
resort  to  this  device.  While  it  does  not,  perhaps, 
constitute  the  strongest  possible  appeal,  yet  it  is 
eminently  serviceable,  since,  if  handled  properly,  it 
does  arouse  interest,  and,  moreover,  it  applies  to 
many  cases. 

Two  examiples  will  show  how  this  method  is  com- 
monly used: 

(a)  The  sarte  men  of  this  country  have  at  last  sighted 
the  large  standing  army  of  unemployed  —  an  army  probably 
many  times  larger  than  the  regular  army  of  which  the 
President  of  the  United  States  is  Commander-in-Chief. 
They  are  beginning  to  realize  that  its  presence  in  our  midst, 
disorganized  and  uncommanded,  constitutes  one  of  the 
greatest  social  problems  which  confront  this  country  to- 
day. Statesmen  and  students,  economists  and  wise  business 
men,  labor  leaders  and  social  workers  everywhere,  are  de- 
manding that  this  problem  shall  be  stated  clearly,  that  the 
facts  in  relation  to  it  shall  be  gathered  and  analyzed,  and 
that  the  solution  for  it  must  be  found.  They  are  insisting 
that  Am.erica  shall  no  longer  lag  behind  the  rest  of  the 

37 


4131'^ 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

civilized  world  in  this   phase  of   its  industrial   organiza- 
tion. 

(b)  The  present  year  sees  Canada  at  the  portals  of  a 
great  change,  passing  from  a  constructive  to  a  productive 
era.  No  other  country-,  all  things  considered,  has  made  such 
material  progress  or  bulked  so  largely  in  the  world's  eye 
during  the  past  decade  as  has  the  Dominion.  Her  advance 
in  every  respect  has  been  nmrvelous,  probably  the  most 
marvelous  in  history;  and  that  this  has  been  arrested  to 
even  a  slight  degree  occasions  surprise,  though  why  this 
should  be  is  difficult  to  understand. 

2.  Timeliness  of  the  subject.  To  show  that  a 
subject  is  timely  is  another  effective  device  for 
arousing  interest.  As  most  people  wish  to  keep 
pace  with  the  times  and  face  the  issues  of  the  day,  it 
is  natural  and  forceful  to  introduce  an  argument 
by  showing  that  the  subject  is  being  discussed  else- 
where, or  by  showing  how  an  event  or  sequence  of 
events  places  the  problem  before  the  public.  The 
arguer  calls  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  question 
does  not  belong  to  the  past  or  to  the  distant  future, 
but  is  of  immediate  interest  and  must  be  settled  at 
once. 

The  recent  rise  in  prices  is  a  matter  of  great  public  in- 
terest. This  is  because  it  affects  so  vitally  the  cost  of  living 
—  a  question  which  has  now  become  of  the  utmost  concern 
to  the  great  majority  of  people,  especially  the  vrage-earning 
and  salaried  classes,  and  others  of  relatively  small  incomes.^ 

3  Yale  Review,  2:704. 

38 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

3.  Appeal  for  one's  self.  The  safest  method  of 
stirring  the  emotions  is  to  make  an  appeal  in  behalf 
of  the  subject,  but  occasionally  a  writer  or  speaker 
who  is  truly  sincere,  who  is  contending  against  un- 
fortunate circumstances,  and  is  not  seeking  personal 
aggrandizement,  may  arouse  interest  by  making  an 
appeal  on  his  own  behalf.  He  may  present  some 
personal  reason  why  the  audience  should  be  inter- 
ested and  give  him  a  respectful  hearing ;  he  calls  at- 
tention not  primarily  to  his  subject,  but  to  his  con- 
nection with  it,  or  to  some  circumstance  in  his  own 
life.  This  method  is  hedged  about  with  several  pit- 
falls :  it  may  expose  one  to  the  charge  of  egotism,  of 
insincerity,  or  of  false  modesty ;  and  it  may  draw  the 
attention  of  the  audience  away  from  the  matter  in 
hand.  To  use  this  method  successfully  one  should 
possess  consummate  tact  and  thorough  knowledge 
of  human  nature. 

The  following  portion  of  an  introduction  to  a 
magazine  article  by  Aaron  Hardy  Ulm  shows  how 
this  device  may  be  used  to  gain  the  confidence  of  the 
audience : 

In  stating  my  premises,  I  must  beg  leave  to  make  some 
personal  explanations.  In  my  fourteenth  year,  circum- 
stances placed  me  in  a  cotton-mill  as  a  fifty-cents-a-day  la- 
borer. I  was  taken  from  the  country,  where  my  home  had 
been  humble  but  comfortable,  and  my  general  environment 

39 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

of  the  average  kind  then  to  be  found  in  the  rural  districts 
of  the  South,  During  the  greater  part  of  three  years,  I 
was  a  regular  operative,  working  in  different  departments, 
and  mostly  in  those  where  children  are  mainly  employed. 
After  that  time,  I  was  fortunate  in  obtaining  employment 
on  the  outside,  but  for  nearly  ten  years  my  life  was  cast 
among  these  people  as  closely  as  if  I  had  been  working  side 
by  side  with  them.* 

4.  An  appeal  to  some  emotion.  One  of  the 
strongest  forms  of  conciliation  is  the  direct  appeal 
to  a  dominant  emotion.  If  an  arguer  can  find  some 
common  ground  on  which  to  meet  his  audience, 
some  emotion  by  which  they  may  be  moved,  he  can 
usually  obtain  a  personal  hold  that  will  overcome 
hostility  and  lack  of  interest.  In  deciding  what 
emotion  to  arouse,  he  must  make  as  careful  and 
thorough  a  study  of  his  audience  as  he  can.  In 
general,  the  use  of  conviction  need  vary  but  little 
to  produce  the  same  results  on  different  men ;  proc- 
esses of  pure  reasoning  are  essentially  the  same 
the  world  around.  But  with  persuasion  the  case 
is  different ;  emotions  are  varied,  and  in  each  sepa- 
rate instance  the  arguer  must  carefully  consider 
the  ruling  passions  and  ideals  of  his  audience.  The 
hopes  and  aspirations  of  a  gang  of  ignorant  miners 
would  differ  widely  from  the  desires  of  an  assembly 
of  college  students,  or  of  a  coterie  of  metropolitan 

4  North  American  Review,   189:890. 
40 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

capitalists.     Education,  wealth,  social  standing,  pol- 
-  itics,  religion,  race,  nationality,  every  motive  that 
■  is  likely  to  have  weight  with  the  audience,  should  be 
taken  into  consideration.     Remembering  that  he  has 
to  choose  between  such  diverse  emotions  as  am- 
bition, fear,  hatred,  love,  patriotism,  sense  of  duty, 
honor,  justice,  self-interest,  pleasure,  and  revenge, 
the  arguer  must  make  his  selection  with  the  greatest 
care,  and  then  drive  home  the  appeal  with  all  the 
force  and  eloquence  at  his  command.     The  higher 
and  nobler  the  emotion  he  can  arouse,  the  greater 
and   more   permanent   will  be   the   result.     If    the 
audience  is  such  that  he  can  successfully  arouse  no 
higher  feeling  than  that  of  self-interest  or  revenge, 
he  will,  of  necessity,  have  to  appeal  to  these  motives ; 
j  but  whenever  he  can,  he  should  appeal  to  the  noblest 
/  sentiments  of  mankind. 

A  famous  illustration  of  the  effectiveness  of  this 
sort  of  conciliation  is  found  in  Patrick  Henry's 
oration  entitled  "  Liberty  or  Death  "  : 

Mr.  President :  No  man  thinks  more  highly  than  I  do  of 
the  patriotism,  as  well  as  abiHties,  of  the  very  worthy  gen- 
tlemen who  have  just  addressed  the  house.  But  different 
men  often  see  the  same  subject  in  different  lights;  and, 
therefore,  I  hope  it  will  not  be  thought  disrespectful  to 
those  gentlemen  if,  entertaining  as  I  do  opinions  of  a  char- 
acter very  opposite  to  theirs,  I  shall  speak  forth  my  senti- 
ments  freely   and  without  reserve.    This  is  no  time  for 

41 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

ceremony.  The  question  before  the  house  is  one  of  awful 
moment  to  this  country.  For  my  own  part,  I  consider  it  as 
nothing  less  than  a  question  of  freedom  or  slavery ;  and  in 
proportion  to  the  magnitude  of  the  subject  ought  to  be  the 
freedom  of  the  debate.  It  is  only  in  this  way  that  we  can 
hope  to  arrive  at  truth,  and  fulfil  the  great  responsibility 
which  we  hold  to  God  and  our  country.  Should  I  keep  back 
my  opinions  at  such  a  time  through  fear  of  giving  offense, 
I  should  consider  myself  as  guilty  of  treason  towards  my 
country,  and  of  an  act  of  disloyalty  toward  the  Majesty  of 
Heaven  which  I  revere  above  all  earthly  kings. ^ 

These,  then,  are  the  suggestions  offered  for  the 
conciliation  of  an  audience :  The  arguer  must  be 
modest,  fair,  and  sincere ;  he  may  arouse  interest  by 
showing  that  his  subject  is  important,  by  showing 
that  it  is  timely,  by  making  an  appeal  for  himself, 
and  by  exciting  some  strong  emotion.  To  be  suc- 
cessful he  should  always  study  his  audTence.  *  •  • 

These  directions  are  far  from  complete.  Any- 
thing like  an  exhaustive  treatment  of  this  subject 
would  in  itself  constitute  a  book.  The  advice  of- 
fered here,  however,  should  be  of  considerable  value 
to  one  who  has  difficulty  in  getting  a  written  ar- 
gument or  a  debate  successfully  launched.  The 
student  should  supplement  this  chapter  with  careful 
study  of  the  work  of  proficient  writers.  If  he  will 
notice  how  they  have  gained  success  in  this  partic- 

5  Patrick  Henry,  in  the  Virginia  Convention,  at  Richmond,  March 
23f  1775- 

42 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

ular,  and  if  he  will  imitate  them,  he  is  bound  to 
improve  his  own  compositions.  The  principal 
dangers  to  be  avoided  consist  of  going  to  extremes. 
The  conciliatory  part  of  the  introduction  should 
not  be  so  meager  that  it  will  fail  to  accomplish  its 
purpose,  nor  should  it  be  so  elaborate  and  artificial 
as  to  hamper  the  onward  movement  of  the  argu- 
ment. The  important  thing  is  to  gain  the  good  w^ill 
and  the  attention  of  the  audience,  and,  other  things 
being  equal,  the  shorter  the  introduction  the  better. 
Further  directions  for  the  spoken  argument  may  be 
found  in  the  chapter  entitled  Debate. 

EXERCISES 

A.  Criticize  the  following  introductory  passages  for  per- 
suasiveness, pointing  out  specifically  the  methods  of  con- 
ciliation used,  and  any  defects  that  may  be  found : 

I.  This  uncounted  multitude  before  me  and  around  me 
proves  the  feeling  which  the  occasion  has  excited.  These 
thousands  of  human  faces,  glowing  with  sympathy  and  joy, 
and  from  the  impulses  of  a  common  gratitude  turned  rev- 
erently to  heaven  in  this  spacious  temple  of  the  firmament, 
proclaim  that  the  day,  the  place,  and  the  purpose  of  our  as- 
sembling have  made  a  deep  impression  on  our  hearts. 

If,  indeed,  there  be  anything  in  local  association  fit  to  af- 
fect the  mind  of  man,  we  need  not  strive  to  repress  the 
emotions  which  agitate  us  here.  We  are  among  the  sepul- 
chers  of  our  fathers.  We  are  on  ground  distinguished  by 
their  valor,  their  constancy,  and  the  shedding  of  their  blood. 
We  are  here,  not  to  fix  an  uncertain  date  in  our  annals,  nor 
to  draw  into  notice  an  obscure  and  unknown  spot.     If  our 

43 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

humble  purpose  had  never  been  conceived,  if  we  ourselves 
had  never  been  born,  the  17th  of  June,  1775,  would  have 
been  a  day  on  which  all  subsequent  history  would  have 
poured  its  hght,  and  the  eminence  where  we  stand  a  point 
of  attraction  to  the  eyes  of  successive  generations.^ 

2.  Mr.  President,  this  is  a  great  public  question ;  a  question 
which  affects  the  welfare  not  only  of  our  boys  and  girls  but 
of  the  mature  vocational  workers,  including  the  home  makers 
of  the  United  States,  as  has  no  other  which  has  been  before 
Congress  for  more  than  half  a  century;  a  question  which 
is  engaging  the  best  thought  of  eminent  publicists  and  edu- 
cators from  one  end  of  the  country  to  the  other  —  indeed, 
throughout  the  civilized  world.  It  is  a  question  which  the 
American  people  have  come  to  believe  directly  affects  the 
economic  conditions  of  the  country  in  a  degree  little,  if  any, 
less  than  the  largest  of  our  large  economic  problems.  It  is 
a  question  which  will,  in  my  judgment,  settle  in  great  meas- 
ure the  quality  of  our  citizenship  in  the  generation  upon 
which  we  are  now  entering. 

3.  Shall  American  stock  exchanges  be  put  under  govern- 
ment regulation  and  control  ? 

This  is  a  question  which  began  to  be  discussed  after  the 
great  depression  in  prices  last  summer  and  the  discussion 
has  been  stimulated  by  several  recent  failures,  in  which  the 
"  bucketing  "  of  orders  and  cool  appropriation  of  customers' 
securities  seem  to  have  been  every-day  occurrences.  Finan- 
cial disaster,  as  on  previous  similar  occasions,  has  involved 
a  train  of  losses,  impoverishment,  and  suicides,  for  which 
the  blame  has  been  cast  by  many  upon  the  organization  of 
the  stock  exchange,  and  often  upon  the  entire  system  of  sell- 
ing products  for  future  delivery.  And  as  measures  for  is- 
suing "  more  money  "  usually  appear  in  Congress  in  times 
of  stress,  there  has  appeared  the  usual  crop  of  measures  for 
taxing  and  regulating  transactions  on  the  exchange. 

4.  Fellow-citizens  of  the  State  of  Ohio:     I  cannot  fail 

6  Daniel  Webster,  First  Bunker  Hill  Monument  Oration. 

44 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

to  remember  that  I  appear  for  the  first  time  before  an  au- 
dience in  this  now  great  State  —  an  audience  that  is  ac- 
customed to  hear  such  speakers  as  Corwin,  and  Chase,  and 
Wade,  and  many  other  renowned  men;  and  remembering 
this,  I  feel  that  it  will  be  well  for  you,  as  for  me,  that  you 
should  not  raise  your  expectations  to  that  standard  to  which 
you  would  have  been  justified  in  raising  them  had  one  of 
these  distinguished  men  appeared  before  you.  You  would 
perhaps  be  only  preparing  a  disappointment  for  yourselves, 
and,  as  a  consequence  of  your  disappointment,  mortification 
for  me.  I  hope,  therefore,  that  you  will  commence  with 
very  moderate  expectations ;  and  perhaps,  if  you  will  give 
me  your  attention,  I  shall  be  able  to  interest  you  in  a  mod- 
erate degree."^ 

5.  The  history  of  English  literature  begins  and  ends  with 
the  name  of  God.  The  opening  verses  of  Caedmon,  the 
first  of  EngHsh  bards,  chant  the  praises  of  the  Almighty 
Maker  of  all  things.  The  last  words  of  Tennyson  and 
Browning,  who  close  the  long  line  of  imperial  torch-bearers, 
sound  the  pean  of  faith  triumphant;  and,  like  a  golden 
thread  through  the  entire  web  of  our  literature,  runs  the  in- 
fluence of  the  English  Bible. 

6.  "  I  say.  Bill,  'ere's  a  quiet  lookin'  cove,  let's  'eave  'arf 
a  brick  at  'im."  These  moving  words,  so  mellifluous  but  so 
direct,  are  placed  by  one  of  Mr,  Punch's  young  men  on  the 
lips  of  an  idly  bellicose  navvy,  and  I  have  borrowed  them  to 
indicate  a  very  common  attitude  toward  the  college  pro- 
fessor. 

7.  May  it  please  your  Honors :  I  am  not  afraid  that  you 
will  underrate  the  importance  of  this  case.  It  concerns  the 
rights  of  the  whole  people.  Such  questions  have  generally 
been  settled  by  arms.  But  since  the  beginning  of  the  world 
no  battle  has  ever  been  lost  or  won  upon  which  the  liberties 
of  a  nation  were  so  distinctly  staked  as  they  are  on  the  re- 
sults of  this  argument.    The  pen  that  writes  the  judgment 

7  Abraham  Lincoln. 

45 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

of  the  court  will  be  mightier  for  good  or  evil  than  any 
sword  that  was  ever  wielded  by  mortal  arm. 

As  might  be  expected  from  the  nature  of  the  subject,  it 
has  been  a  good  deal  discussed  elsewhere,  in  legislative 
bodies,  in  public  assemblies,  and  in  the  newspaper  press  of 
the  country.  But  there  it  has  been  mingled  with  interests 
and  feelings  not  very  friendly  to  a  correct  conclusion.  Here 
we  are  in  a  higher  atmosphere,  where  no  passion  can  dis- 
turb the  judgment  or  shake  the  even  balance  in  which  the 
scales  of  reason  are  held.  Here  it  is  purely  a  judicial  ques- 
tion; and  I  can  speak  for  my  colleagues  as  well  as  myself 
when  I  say  that  we  have  no  thought  to  suggest  which  we 
do  not  suppose  to  be  a  fair  element  in  the  strictly  legal 
judgment  which  you  are  required  to  make  up.^ 

B.  On  the  affirmative  side  of  one  of  the  following  propo- 
sitions, write  the  conciliatory  portion  of  an  introduction, 
using  about  two  hundred  words,  suited  to  the  audience  in- 
dicated : 

AN   AUDIENCE  OF  EMPLOYERS 

1.  Workingmen  are  not  receiving  a  fair  wage. 

2.  The  eight-hour  day  without  reduction  in  wages  should 
be  adopted  in  all  industries. 

3.  Labor  unions  have  been  a  benefit  to  the  United  States. 

AN   AUDIENCE  OF   MANUFACTURERS 

4.  A  low  tariff  would  benefit  the  United  States  as  a  whole. 

5.  Freight  rates  should  be  increased. 

AN   AUDIENCE   OF  WORKINGMEN 

6.  Labor  unions  are  a  detriment  to  the  country. 

7.  High  wages  are  responsible  for  the  high  cost  of  living. 

8.  Railroad  employees  in  the  United  States  are  receiving 
higher  wages  than  they  deserve. 

8  Jeremiah  S.  Black,  The  Right  to  Trial  by  Jury. 

46 


The  Introduction — Persuasion 

AN  AUDIENCE  OF   COLLEGE   STUDENTS 

9.  American  colleges  should  abolish  intercollegiate  ath- 
letics. 

10.  Student  government  is  not  for  the  best  interests  of  a 
college. 


47 


CHAPTER  IV 

THE  INTRODUCTION  — CONVICTION 

As  soon  as  the  persuasive  portion  of  an  introduc- 
tion has  rendered  the  audience  friendly,  attentive, 
and  open  to  conviction,  the  process  of  reasoning 
should  begin.  First  of  all,  it  is  the  duty  of  the  ar- 
guer  to  see  that  the  meaning  of  the  proposition  is 
perfectly  clear  both  to  himself  and  to  all  the  people 
whom  he  wishes  to  reach.  If  the  arguer  does  not 
thoroughly  comprehend  his  subject,  he  is  likely  to 
produce  only  a  jumble  of  facts  and  reasoning,  or  at 
best  he  may  establish  a  totally  different  proposition 
from  the  one  that  confronts  him ;  if  the  audience 
fails  to  understand  just  what  is  being  proved  they 
remain  uninfluenced.  The  amount  of  explanation 
required  to  show  what  the  proposition  means  varies 
according  to  the  intelligence  of  the  people  addressed 
and  their  familiarity  with  the  subject. 

DEFINITION 

To  begin  with,  if  there  are  any  unfamiliar  v/ords 
in  the  proposition,  any  terms  or  expressions  that 

48 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

are  liable  to  be  misunderstood  or  not  comprehended 
instantly,  they  must  be  defined.  At  this  point  the 
arguer  has  to  exercise  considerable  judgment  both 
in  determining  what  words  to  define  and  in  choosing 
a  definition  that  is  accurate  and  clear.  Synonyms 
are  almost  always  untrustworthy  or  as  incompre- 
hensible as  the  original  word,  and  other  dictionary 
definitions  are  usually  framed  either  in  too  technical 
language  to  be  easily  grasped  or  in  too  general  lan- 
guage to  apply  inevitably  to  the  case  at  hand. 

Definition  by  authority.  x\s  a  rule,  the  very 
best  definitions  that  can  be  used  are  quotations  from 
the  works  of  men  distinguished  for  their  knowledge 
in  the  special  subject  to  which  the  word  to  be  de- 
fined belongs.  The  eminent  economist  defines  eco- 
nomic terms ;  the  statesman,  political  terms ;  the  jur- 
ist, legal  terms;  the  scientist,  scientific  terms;  the 
theologian,  the  meaning  of  religious  phraseolog>\ 
To  present  these  definitions  accurately,  and  to  be 
sure  of  the  author's  meaning,  one  should  take  the 
quotations  directly  from  the  author's  work  itself. 
If,  however,  this  source  is  not  at  hand,  or  if  time  for 
research  is  lacking,  one  may  often  find  in  legal  and 
economic  dictionaries  and  in  encyclopedias  the  very 
quotations  that  he  wishes  to  use  in  defining  a  term. 
It  is  always  well,  in  quoting  a  definition,  to  tell 

49 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

who  the  authority  is;  unless  he  is  particularly  well 
known,  some  information  which  will  show  that  he 
actually  is  an  authority  should  be  given;  moreover, 
it  is  usually  well  to  make  an  exact  reference  to  the 
passage  quoted.  The  following  is  an  excellent  illus- 
tration of  definition  by  authority : 

It  is  necessary  at  the  outset  that  we  have  a  clear  under- 
standing as  to  what  is  meant  by  scientific  management.  To 
obtain  it,  we  will  go  at  once  to  headquarters.  Mr.  Fred- 
erick W.  Taylor,  consulting  engineer,  Philadelphia,  is 
acknowledged  as  the  dean  of  the  efficiency  experts  and  the 
originator  of  the  new  system.  Mr.  Taylor  was  conspicu- 
ously successful  in  his  management  of  the  Midvale  Steel 
Company,  where  he  was  successively  laborer,  foreman, 
superintendent,  and  general  manager.  There  his  system  was 
first  worked  out.  In  addition  he  has  also  made  an  inter- 
national reputation  as  the  inventor  of  high-speed  steel  for 
metal-cutting  tools  and  drills,  an  achievement  in  itself  suf- 
ficient to  stamp  him  as  a  man  of  remarkable  scientific  attain- 
ments. 

The  fundamental  principles  of  Mr.  Taylor's  system  are 
definite,  and  are  set  forth  by  him  as  follows :  * 

First.  Each  man  in  the  establishment,  high  or  low, 
should  daily  have  a  clearly  defined  task  laid  out  before  him. 
This  task  should  not  in  the  least  degree  be  vague  or  in- 
definite, but  should  be  circumscribed  carefully  and  com- 
pletely, and  should  not  be  easy  to  accomplish. 

Second.  Each  man's  task  should  call  for  a  full  day's 
work,  and,  at  the  same  time,  the  workman  should  be  given 
such  conditions  and  such  appliances  as  will  enable  him  to 
accomplish  his  task  with  certainty. 

Third.  He  should  be  sure  of  large  pay  when  he  accom- 
plishes his  task. 

50 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

Fourth.  When  he  fails,  he  should  be  sure  that  sooner  or 
later  he  will  be  the  loser  by  it. 

Fifth.  When  an  establishment  has  reached  an  advanced 
state  of  organization,  in  many  cases  the  task  should  be  made 
so  difficult  that  it  can  be  accomplished  only  by  a  first-class 
man.i 

[*  From  a  paper  read  by  Mr.  Taylor  before  the  American 
Society  of  Mechanical  Engineers,  June,  1903.] 

A  definition  by  authority  may  consist  of  the  exact 
words  that  the  man  quoted  has  used,  or  it  may  con- 
sist of  a  summary  of  what  he  has  said,  or  it  may 
consist  of  a  summary  of  what  several  writers  have 
said. 

Definition  by  illustration.  Since  the  purpose  of 
each  step  in  the  reasoning  portion  of  the  introduc- 
tion is  to  convey  information  accurately,  quickly, 
and,  above  all  else,  clearly,  a  particularly  good 
method  for  defining  terms  is  by  illustration.  In  us- 
ing this  method,  one  holds  up  to  view  a  concrete  ex- 
ample of  the  special  significance  of  the  word  that  is 
being  explained.  He  shows  how  the  law,  or  cus- 
tom, or  principle,  or  whatever  is  being  expounded, 
works  in  actual  practice.  For  example,  if  he  is  ad- 
vocating the  superiority  of  the  large  college  over  the 
small  college,  he  should  define  each  term  by  giving 
specific  examples  of  large  colleges  and  of  small  col- 

1  W.  J.  Cunningham,  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  25:541. 
51 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

leges.  The  advantage  of  this  method  Hes  in  its  sim- 
plicity and  clearness,  qualities  which  enable  the  audi- 
ence to  understand  the  discussion  without  much  con- 
scious effort  on  their  part.  Investigation  reveals 
that  the  definitions  of  great  writers  and  speakers  are 
replete  with  illustration.  Whenever  the  student  of 
argumentation  has  something  to  define  that  is  par- 
ticularly intricate  or  hard  to  understand,  he  should 
illustrate  it.  If  he  fails  to  find  already  prepared  an 
illustrative  definition  that  exactly  fits  his  needs,  he 
will  often  do  well  to  learn  just  what  the  term  means, 
and  then  make  his  own  illustration. 

Consider  how  this  method  has  been  used.  The 
term  "  closed  shop  "  has  been  defined  as  follows : 

The  "closed  shop"  means  just  this:  John  Smith  owns  a 
cotton  mill  in  New  England.  He  employs  only  union  labor. 
One  day  he  needed  an  expert  dyer.  A  skilled  operative  ap- 
plied for  the  job,  but  Mr.  Smith  could  not  hire  him  because 
he  was  not  a  member  of  the  union.  It  made  no  difference 
whether  he  had  tried  to  join  the  organization  or  not, 
whether  he  was  wilhng  to  join  it  or  not;  it  made  no  dif- 
ference how  much  his  serv^ices  were  needed.  Until  he  actu- 
ally had  a  union  card,  the  other  employees  in  that  mill  would 
not  work  beside  him. 

Notice  how  the  following  quotation  makes  plain 
the  meaning  of  "  social  productivity  " : 

Except  the  Socialists,  it  may  be  said  that  there  is  to-day 
no  one  to  deny  the  productivity  of  the  preacher  or  singer 

52 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

or  actor  or  teacher  or  man  servant  or  maid  servant.  If  the 
artisan  who  constructs  a  violin  is  productive,  so,  also,  is  the 
artist  who  plays  it.  If  to  grow  wheat  or  to  grind  it  is  eco- 
nomic production,  so  is  baking  it.  If  we  may  regard  as  pro- 
ductive the  industry  which  furnishes  the  beef,  so  may  we 
also  the  industry  that  cooks  it;  we  eat  the  broiling  on  our 
steak  as  truly  as  we  eat  the  steak.  If  a  stock  car  is  produc- 
tive in  transporting  beeves  over  wide  intervals  of  space,  so 
likewise  must  be  the  waiter  who  brings  the  steak  from  the 
kitchen  or  passes  it  at  the  table.  One  colorist  with  his  brush 
fixes  his  fancies  upon  canvas ;  another  color  worker  by  the 
magic  of  his  words  paints  pictures  on  the  tablets  of  the 
mind;  the  fact  that  we  pay  for  either  shows  either  to  be 
value  rendering.  To  create  matter  is  in  truth  given  to  none 
of  us;  we  only  arrange  and  combine  and  distribute.^ 

EXPLANATION 

Not  only  must  the  arguer  define  the  unfamiliar 
words  that  occur  in  the  proposition,  but  he  must 
also  explain  the  meaning  of  the  proposition  taken 
as  a  whole.  Since  an  audience  often  has  neither 
the  inclination  nor  the  opportunity  to  give  a  prop- 
osition careful  thought  and  study,  the  disputant 
himself  must  make  clear  the  matter  in  dispute,  and 
show  exactly  where  the  difference  in  opinion  be- 
tween the  affirmative  and  the  negative  lies.  This 
process  is  of  great  importance;  it  removes  the 
subject  of  dispute  from  the  realm  of  mere  words  -^ 
words  which  arranged  in  a  formal  statement  are 

2  H.  J.  Davenport,  Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics,  25:97. 

53 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

to  many  often  incomprehensible  —  and  brings  out 
clearly  the  idea  that  is  to  be  supported  or  con- 
demned. 

To  discover  just  what  the  proposition  means,  the 
arguer  must  weigh  each  word,  carefully  noting  its 
meaning  and  its  significance  in  the  proposition. 
To  neglect  a  single  word  is  disastrous.  An  inter- 
collegiate debate  was  once  lost  because  the  affirma- 
tive side  did  not  take  into  consideration  the  words 
"  present  tendency  "  in  the  proposition,  "'  Resolved, 
That  the  present  tendency  of  labor  unions  is  detri- 
mental to  the  prosperity  of  the  United  States." 
The  negative  side  admitted  everything  that  the 
affirmative  established,  namely,  that  unions  are 
detrimental;  and  won  by  showing  that  their  tend- 
ency is  beneficial.  In  another  college  debate  on  the 
subject,  "Resolved,  That  the  United  States  should 
immediately  dispose  of  the  Philippines,"  one  side 
failed  to  meet  the  real  point  at  issue  because  it  ig- 
nored the  word  "  immediately.''  A  thorough  ex- 
planation of  the  proposition  would  have  shown  the 
limitations  that  this  w^ord  imposed  upon  the  dis- 
cussion. 

In  the  next  place,  the  arguer  should  usually  pre- 
sent to  the  audience  a  brief  history  of  the  matter 
in  dispute.     Many  debatable  subjects  are  of  such 

54 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

a  nature  that  the  arguer  himself  cannot,  until  he 
has  studied  the  history  of  the  proposition,  fully 
understand  what  constitutes  the  clash  in  opinion 
between  the  affirmative  and  the  negative  sides.  To 
understand  the  debate,  the  audience  must  possess 
this  same  information.  An  historical  sketch  would 
be  absolutely  necessary  to  render  intelligible  such 
subjects  as:  ''Japan's  declaration  of  war  against 
Germany  was  unjustifiable  " ;  "  The  canteen  should 
be  restored  to  the  United  States  army  " ;  "  Congress 
should  abridge  the  powers  of  the  Interstate  Com- 
merce Commission." 

In  the  last  place,  the  arguer  must  give  his  audi- 
ence all  essential  information  concerning  the  matter 
in  dispute.  For  example,  if  the  proposition  is, 
"  Naturalization  laws  in  the  United  States  should  be 
more  stringent,"  a  mere  definition  of  "  naturaliza- 
tion laws  "  is  not  enough ;  the  disputant  must  tell 
just  what  naturalization  laws  exist  at  the  present 
time,  and  just  how  stringent  they  are  to-day.  Again, 
if  the  subject  is,  ''  The  United  States  army  should 
be  enlarged,"  the  arguer  must  tell  exactly  how  large 
the  army  is  now.  If  the  proposition  is,  ''  The  right 
of  suffrage  should  be  further  limited  by  an  educa- 
tional test,"  the  arguer  must  state  what  limits  now 
exist,  and  he  must  also  tell  what  is  meant  by  ''an 

55 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

educational  test."  In  a  debate  the  work  of  the 
affirmative  and  of  the  negative  differ  sHghtly  at 
this  point.  Since  the  proposition  reads  an  educa- 
tional test,  the  advocate  for  the  affirmative  has  the 
privilege  of  upholding  any  sort  of  educational  test 
that  he  wishes  to  defend,  provided  only  that  it 
comes  v/ithin  the  limits  of  ''  an  educational  test." 
He  may  say  that  the  test  should  consist  of  a  knowl- 
edge of  the  alphabet,  or  he  may  advocate  an 
examination  in  higher  mathematics ;  but  he  is  under 
obligation  to  outline  carefully  and  thoroughly  some 
specific  system.  The  negative,  on  the  other  hand, 
must  be  prepared  to  overthrow  whatever  system 
is  brought  forward.  If  the  affirmative  fails  to  out- 
line any  system,  the  negative  has  only  to  call  atten- 
tion to  this  fact  to  put  the  affirmative  in  a  very 
embarrassing  position. 

The  following  quotation  concerning  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Panama  Canal  Zone  shows  how  a  prop- 
osition may  be  explained  in  a  magazine  article  or  a 
student's  debate: 

NECESSARY  PANAMA  CANAL  LEGISLATION 

From  the  American  occupation  of  the  Canal  Zone  in  1904 
until  the  present  time,  the  Zone  has  been  governed  by  the 
President  of  the  United  States,  whose  executive  orders  are 
the  law  of  the  land.  The  President  has  acted  without  a 
grant  of  authority  by  Congress,  there  being  no  disposition 

=;6 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

on  the  part  of  Congress  to  place  any  restrictions  whatever 
upon  the  President  other  than  those  imposed  upon  him  by 
the  Spooner  Act  of  1902,  which  instructed  the  President  to 
construct  the  Canal  through  the  agency  of  a  commission  of 
seven  men.  The  time  has  now  come  when  Congress  should 
definitely  authorize  the  President  to  govern  the  Zone  in  the 
future. 

Different  views  are  held  concerning  the  policy  to  be 
adopted  for  the  future  government  of  the  Canal  Zone  and 
for  the  operation  of  the  Canal.  There  are  those  v/ho,  ani- 
mated by  a  zeal  for  the  spread  of  democratic  institutions, 
would  seek  to  make  the  Zone  a  modern  republic  —  an  ideal 
to  inspire  all  Latin  America.  Those  who  are  of  this  mind 
would  maximize  the  civil  government  of  the  Zone,  place  a 
civilian  governor  at  its  head,  and  make  the  superintendent, 
or  director  of  the  Canal,  a  subordinate  in  charge  of  one  de- 
partment of  the  administration. 

Others,  equally  patriotic,  would  have  Congress  authorize 
the  President  of  the  United  States  to  establish  military  rule 
upon  the  Isthmus  by  placing  a  major-general  in  charge  of 
the  fortifications  and  making  him  the  director  of  the 
Canal. 

Those  who  would  emphasize  the  civil  authority  would  dis- 
sociate the  civil  and  military  functions  of  government  and 
would  welcome  the  settlement  of  the  Canal  Zone,  preferably 
by  a  permanent  population  of  American  homesteaders ;  while 
those  who  advocate  the  military  administration  of  the  Canal 
contend  that  the  Zone  cannot  be  profitably  cultivated,  and 
that  if  successful  farming  were  possible,  the  portions  of 
the  Zone  not  occupied  by  the  Canal  and  its  appur- 
tenances should  be  kept  as  a  government  reservation  to 
be  used  as  future  needs  may  require  for  the  enlargement 
of  the  Canal  and  for  the  purposes  of  the  army  and  navy. 

The  problem,  thus  stated,  seems  to  be  clear  cut.  Shall 
the  Zone  be  a  military  reservation,  and  shall  the  Canal  and 
the  Zone  be  subject  to  the  commander  of  the  forts,  or  shall 

57 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

the  three  hundred  and  forty  square  miles  (more  or  less) 
of  land  withhi  the  Canal  Zone  not  immediatel}^  required  by 
the  Canal  and  its  auxihary  works  and  structures  be  made, 
if  possible,  the  seat  of  a  model  democracy  whose  civil  gov- 
ernor, selected  by  the  President  of  the  United  States,  shall 
be  responsible  for  the  operation  of  the  Canal?  ^ 

ISSUES 

Following  the  discovery  of  the  real  meaning 
of  the  proposition,  comes  the  finding  of  the  issues. 
Whenever  a  man  in  business,  professional,  or 
political  life,  or  in  any  circumstances  whatsoever, 
must  determine  upon  some  policy  or  come  to  some 
decision  regarding  theoretical  or  practical  matters, 
he  formulates  his  belief  and  chooses  his  line  of 
action  in  accordance  with  the  answers  that  he  makes 
to  certain  questions  either  consciously  or  uncon- 
sciously present  in  his  mind.  For  instance,  if  he 
considers  the  purchase  of  a  certain  piece  of  real 
estate,  he  says  to  himself:  *' Is  the  price  fair?" 
"  Have  I  the  money  to  invest  ?  "  "  Can  I  sell  or 
use  the  property  to  good  advantage  ?  "  "  How  much 
pleasure  shall  I  derive  from  it?"  If  he  answers 
these  questions  in  one  way,  the  purchase  is  likely 
to  be  made;  if  in  another,  it  is  not.  Again,  a 
board  of  college  trustees  may  be  considering  the 

C  Emory  R.  Johnson,  North  American  Review,  194:714. 

58 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

abolishment  of  football.  In  arriving  at  a  decision, 
they  are  confronted  with  these  questions :  '*  Is  the 
game  beneficial  or  detrimental  to  the  player  ? " 
'''  How  does  it  affect  the  college  as  a  whole  ? " 
Those  who  favor  the  game  will,  of  course,  say  that 
it  is  a  benefit  to  the  player  and  the  whole  college; 
v/hile  those  who  oppose  it  will  maintain  that  it  is  a 
detriment  to  all  concerned.  But  evidently  the  same 
questions  must  be  met  and  answered  by  both  sides. 
These  questions  are  called  issues. 

Issues  are  subdivisions  of  the  subject  under  dis- 
cussion, and  are  always  essentially  the  same  for  any 
given  idea.  The  first  requirement  for  the  issues 
of  any  proposition  is  that  they  be  comprehensive; 
that  is,  the  sum  of  their  ideas  must  equal  the  main 
idea  expressed  in  the  proposition.  To  those  who 
are  carrying  on  the  discussion  and  to  the  audience, 
if  there  is  one,  it  must  be  perfectly  evident  that 
these  questions  cover  the  entire  field  of  controversy ; 
that  if  these  questions  are  satisfactorily  answered 
in  one  way  or  the  other,  the  discussion  is  settled 
and  nothing  remains  to  be  said.  The  second  re- 
quirement is  that  the  issues  consider  only  disputed 
matter.  A  question  that  gives  rise  to  no  disagree- 
ment, that  admittedly  has  but  one  answer,  is  never 
an  issue.    Issues,  therefore,  may  he  defined  as  the 

59 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

questions  that  must  be  answered  by  both  the  affirma- 
tive and  the  negative  sides  of  the  proposition  under 
discussion  and  that,  if  answered  in  one  way,  estab- 
lish the  proposition,  and  if  anszvered  in  another  way, 
overthrow  it. 

The  issues  of  a  proposition  exist  independently 
of  the  side  that  is  being  upheld.  The  affirmative 
will  find  the  same  issues  as  the  negative,  but  it 
rarely  happens  that  two  men  will  divide  a  proposi- 
tion in  exactly  the  same  manner  and  thus  state  the 
issues  in  precisely  the  same  language.  If,  however, 
the  work  of  both  has  been  fair  and  complete,  their 
issues  will  not  vary  in  any  important  particular. 
For  example,  under  the  subject,  "  The  Federal 
government  should  own  and  operate  the  railroads 
of  the  United  States,"  one  person  might  give  as 
issues : 

1.  Has  the  government  the  right  to  take  the  roads 
without  the  consent  of  the  present  owners? 

2.  Is  the  government  financially  able  to  buy  the 
roads  ? 

3.  Does  the  present  system  contain  serious  de- 
fects ? 

4.  Will  the  proposed  system  remove  these  defects 
without  bringing  in  new  evils  equally  serious  ? 

Another  might  state  as  issues : 
60 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

1.  Is  the  proposed  plan  practicable? 

2.  Will  it  benefit  the  people  ? 

The  issues  in  both  instances,  however,  are  es- 
sentially the  same,  as  questions  one  and  two  of  the 
first  list  are  equivalent  to  one  of  the  second;  and 
three  and  four  of  the  first,  to  two  of  the  second. 

At  this  point  it  may  be  well  to  micntion  a  common 
error  that  must  be  guarded  against.  It  often  hap- 
pens that  a  question  is  stated  as  an  issue  which  is 
not  a  subdivision  of  the  proposition  at  all,  but  is 
the  entire  proposition  itself,  framed  in  slightly  dif- 
ferent language.  Such  would  be  the  error  if  the 
question,  "Would  the  change  be  desirable?"  were 
used  as  an  issue  for  the  proposition,  "  All  State 
colleges  should  abolish  secret  societies." 

It  sometimes  happens  that  one  is  forced  to  defend 
or  attack  what  has  been  called  a  "  combined  propo- 
sition," a  proposition  that  contains  two  distinct  sub- 
jects for  argument.  Such  subjects  are  to  be  avoided 
as  much  as  possible,  but  when  they  must  be  met,  it 
is  usually  necessary  to  have  two  separate  sets  of 
issues.  An  example  of  such  a  proposition  would  be, 
"  All  American  colleges  and  universities  should  adopt 
the  honor  system." 

The  only  practicable  method  of  finding  the  issues 
of  a  proposition  is  to  question  it  from  all  pertinent 

6i 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

points  of  view,  and  then  to  eliminate  all  questions 
that  have  no  vital  bearing  on  the  subject,  or  that 
are  acknowledged  to  have  but  one  answer.  The 
questions  that  remain  are  the  issues.  In  using  this 
method  of  analysis,  one  must  be  careful  to  consider 
the  proposition  in  all  its  phases  and  details,  and 
from  both  the  affirmative  and  the  negative  sides. 
Neglect  to  give  the  subject  thorough  consideration 
often  results  in  one's  being  suddenly  confronted 
with  an  issue  that  he  has  not  previously  discovered 
and  consequently  cannot  meet.  Failure  to  cast 
aside  all  questions  that  are  not  real  issues  may 
cause  equal  embarrassment :  an  arguer  never  wishes 
to  waste  time  and  effort  in  estabhshing  proof  that 
is  not  essential  to  the  argument,  or  that  is  admitted 
by  the  other  side. 

It  is  hardly  possible  even  to  suggest  all  the  various 
kinds  of  questions  that  may  be  asked  about  de- 
batable subjects.  An  arguer  must  depend  largely 
upon  his  own  judgment  and  common  sense  in 
analyzing  each  proposition  that  he  meets.  He  may, 
however,  find  the  issues  of  many  propositions  by 
carefully  questioning  them  from  certain  important 
and  comprehensive  points  of  view.  The  list  of 
standpoints  indicated  here  is  not  exhaustive;  only 
the  more   important   and   general   standpoints   are 

62 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

considered.  The  student  should  bear  in  mind  that 
the  following  instructions  are  designed  to  teach 
him  a  practical  method  of  analysis ;  they  do  not  con- 
stitute a  formula  that  can  be  applied  in  all  instances. 
First,  the  analysis  of  propositions  of  policy  will  be 
taken  up;  secondly,  the  analysis  of  propositions  of 
fact. 

PROPOSITIONS  OF  POLICY 

I.  Is  the  plan  practicable?  Whenever  a  plan 
is  proposed,  first  ask  whether  or  not  it  is  practicable. 
If  those  who  oppose  the  idea  maintain  that  great 
obstacles  exist  which  will  prevent  the  undertaking 
of  the  project  or  hinder  its  execution,  then  the 
question  of  practicability  constitutes  an  important 
issue.  For  instance,  one  who  contemplates  a 
thorough  argument  on  the  proposition,  "  The  United 
States  navy  should  be  greatly  enlarged,''  must  prove 
that  the  plan  is,  or  is  not,  practicable.  Plainly,  such 
hindrances  as  enormous  expense,  inadequate  facili- 
ties for  building  and  repairing  battleships,  and  the 
increased  demand  for  officers  and  sailors  render 
questionable  the  expediency  of  such  a  measure. 
This  issue,  however,  is  not  found  in  connection  with 
all  propositions;  it  does  not  concern  propositions 
that  micrely   approve  or   condemn   existing   condi- 

63 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

tions  or  assert  the  occurrence  of  an  event.  For 
example,  practicability  does  not  enter  into  such 
subjects  as  these:  ''  The  boycott  is  morally  justifi- 
able " ;  "  The  maintenance  of  a  large  standing  army 
is  provocative  of  war  " ;  "  Congress  should  repeal  the 
Sherman  Law."  But  most  propositions  that  advo- 
cate a  change,  that  propose  some  new  system  of  op- 
eration, have  this  issue  involved.  Such  subjects 
are :  "  A  national  prohibitor}^  law  offers  the  best 
solution  of  the  liquor  problem " ;  "  Congress 
should  provide  for  uniform  Federal  marriage  and 
divorce  laws " ;  "  The  United  States  should  dis- 
pose of  the  Philippines." 

2.  Will  the  proposed  plan  be  a  moral  benefit 
or  detriment  to  those  concerned?  Not  all  prop- 
ositions, by  any  means,  but  many,  are  of  such  a 
character  that  they  must  be  considered  from  the 
standpoint  of  morality.  The  arguer  must  ask 
whether  the  idea  involved  in  the  subject  is  morally 
right  or  wrong;  whether  it  is  morally  beneficial  or 
harmful.  This  point  of  view  includes  more  than 
at  first  appears.  It  takes  into  consideration  justice, 
duty,  honesty,  faithfulness,  religion,  ever}'thing  that 
pertains  to  what  is  right  or  wrong.  Under  the 
proposition,  "  The  treatment  of  the  American  Indi- 
ans by  the  United  States  should  be  condemned,"  ap- 

64 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

pears  the  moral  issue,  "  What  is  our  duty  toward 
the  people  of  this  race?"  The  proposition,  **  Pub- 
lic libraries,  museums,  and  art  galleries  should  be 
open  on  Sunday,"  presents  this  issue,  "  Is  the 
method  of  recreation  afforded  by  the  opening  of 
these  buildings  in  accordance  with  the  teachings 
of  the  Christian  religion  ? "  The  proposition, 
"  Football  is  an  undesirable  college  game,"  must 
be  settled  in  part  by  the  answer  to  the  question, 
"  Is  the  game  beneficial  or  harmful  to  the  player's 
character  ?  " 

3.  Will  the  proposed  plan  be  a  material  benefit 
or  detriment?  In  the  third  place,  the  proposition 
should  be  questioned  from  a  material  point  of  view, 
to  determine  whether  the  plan  is,  or  is  likely  to 
be,  a  benefit  or  a  detriment.  In  some  form  this 
issue  will  doubtless  be  found  in  connection  with  al- 
most every  proposition  of  policy.  In  all  systems 
of  government,  of  business,  and  even  of  education, 
material  betterment  is  invariably  one  of  the  ulti- 
mate objects  sought.  The  question  of  national  ex- 
pansion presents  the  issue,  "  Will  such  a  course 
add  to  the  glory,  the  prestige,  or  the  wealth  of  the 
nation  ?  "  When  a  boy  considers  going  to  college, 
he  desires  to  know  whether  a  college  education  is 
a  valuable  asset  in  business,  social,  or  professional 

65 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

life.  An  issue  which  puts  to  the  touch  the  mat- 
ter of  personal  gain  is  sure  to  involve  a  substantial 
portion  of  the  controversy.  The  arguer  who  can 
decisively  settle  the  question  of  dollars  and  cents 
always  has  a  strong  argument.  Usually  the  issue 
involving  the  question  of  material  benefit  or  detri- 
ment is  plain  and  direct;  sometimes,  however,  it 
is  partially  concealed.  A  man  debating  on  the  af- 
firmative side  of  the  proposition,  "  Resolved ,  That 
candidates  for  the  Presidency  of  the  United  States 
should  be  nominated  by  the  direct  primary  sys- 
tem," may  urge  as  a  reason  that  such  a  method  will 
result  in  purer  politics.  This  particular  line  of  ar- 
gument he  may  carry  no  further,  taking  it  for 
granted  that  every  one  will  recognize  the  connec- 
tion between  honest  ofiice  holders  and  material 
gain. 

4.  Will  the  proposed  plan  be  an  intellectual 
benefit  or  detriment?  All  propositions  that  deal 
with  education  or  with  other  matters  that  pertain 
to  man's  progress  and  advancement  should  be 
viewed  from  an  intellectual  standpoint.  No  per- 
son in  discussing  a  measure  bearing  upon  the  wel- 
fare of  an  individual,  of  a  community,  or  of  a  na- 
tion, can  afford  to  neglect  questioning  its  influence 
for  mental  advancement  or  retrogression.     Propo- 

66 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

sitions  relating  to  schools,  colleges,  and  similar  in- 
stitutions, and  propositions  dealing  with  social  and 
industrial  conditions,  present  this  issue.  Modern 
theories  of  government,  both  municipal  and  na- 
tional, are  frequently  based  to  some  extent  upon 
the  idea  of  teaching  the  people  how  to  live  and 
how  to  govern  themselves.  The  policy  of  the 
United  States  in  the  Philippines  and  in  the  West 
Indies  has  been  greatly  influenced  by  the  query, 
"  How  will  it  affect  the  intellectual  welfare  of  the 
people  concerned?" 

5.  Will  the  proposed  plan  be  a  physical  bene- 
fit or  detriment?  All  subjects  that  concern  the 
life,  health,  strength,  or  in  any  way  bear  upon  the 
physical  well-being  of  man,  present  this  issue.  An 
argument  on  government  ownership  of  railroads 
would  have  to  answer  the  question,  "  Under  which 
system  will  fewer  accidents  occur  ? "  All  such 
propositions  as,  "  Eight  hours  ought  legally  to  con- 
stitute a  working  day  " ;  "  State  boards  of  health 
should  compel  all  persons  afflicted  with  contagious 
diseases  to  be  quarantined  " ;  ''  Football  is  an  un- 
desirable college  game,"  give  rise  to  the  issue  of 
physical  welfare. 

6.  Will  the  proposed  plan  be  a  political  benefit 
or  detriment?     If  a  plan  is  of  such  far-reaching 

67 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

significance  that  its  adoption  or  rejection  would 
affect  a  whole  town,  state,  or  nation,  then  its  mer- 
its usually  depend  to  some  extent  upon  its  political 
significance.  The  issue  may  take  some  such  form 
as,  ''  How  will  the  system  affect  the  country  po- 
litically?" "Will  the  system  encourage  bribery 
and  graft,  or  will  it  tend  to  do  away  with  these 
evils?"     "What  will  be  its  effect  upon  bossism?" 

7.  How  has  the  plan  succeeded  where  it  has 
been  tried?  This  question  frequently  occurs  as 
an  issue  in  connection  with  all  sorts  of  proposi- 
tions. Its  importance  and  significance  are  so  evi- 
dent that  no  explanation  is  needed.  The  value  of 
precedent  is  known  to  every  one. 

8.  Does  the  present  system  contain  serious 
evils?  The  asking  of  this  question  is  frequently 
one  of  the  very  best  ways  to  get  at  the  heart  of  a 
proposition  of  pohcy.  To  be  sure,  this  question 
overlaps  and  embraces  several  other  questions  that 
have  been  suggested,  but  a  comprehensive  issue  like 
this  is  sometimes  preferable  from  the  standpoint 
both  of  the  arguer  and  of  the  audience.  It  removes 
from  the  arguer  the  necessity  of  classifying  each 
evil  under  the  head  of  moral,  financial,  intellectual, 
etc. ;  and  in  many  cases  it  results  in  an  argument 
more  easily  understood  by  the  audience.     In  some 

68 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

form  this  issue  applies  to  nearly  all  political,  eco- 
nomic, and  financial  propositions. 

9.  If  the  present  system  does  contain  serious 
evils,  will  the  proposed  system  remove  them? 
Equal  in  importance  with  the  question  as  to  whether 
the  existing  system  is  defective,  is  the  question  as 
to  whether  the  proposed  system  will  remove  these 
defects,  without,  of  course,  introducing  equally 
great  disadvantages.  These  two  issues  almost  in- 
variably go  together ;  they  set  the  system  advocated 
by  the  affirmative  and  the  system  advocated  by  the 
negative  side  by  side,  and  compare  and  contrast 
each  with  the  other. 

10.  If  the  present  system  contains  serious 
evils,  is  the  proposed  system  the  only  remedy? 
This  last  question  is  very  closely  connected  with 
the  two  preceding  questions.  The  whole  discus- 
sion may  hinge  not  on  w^hether  evils  exist,  but  on 
how  they  shall  be  remedied.  If  the  argument  takes 
this  turn,  the  advocates  of  a  certain  system  must 
show  that  their  plan  is  the  only  one  suitable  for 
adoption,  or,  at  least,  is  the  best  plan,  w^hile  the 
negative  must  introduce  and  uphold  a  totally  dif- 
ferent scheme.  For  instance,  under  the  proposi- 
tion, "  The  United  States  army  should  be  greatly 
enlarged,"  the  first  two  issues  would  probably  be 

69 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

these :  "  Is  the  present  army  adequate  to  protect 
the  nation?  "  and  "  Is  the  enlargement  of  the  army 
the  only  means  of  rendering  the  nation  safe  from 
invasion  ?  " 


PROPOSITIONS  OF  FACT 

I.  Does  the  proposition  state  a  possible  truth? 
To  find  the  issues  of  a  proposition  of  fact,  first 
ask  whether  the  occurrence  in  question  could  have 
happened  or  the  condition  alleged  in  the  proposi- 
tion could  possibly  have  existed.  This  question  is 
so  important  that  if  it  can  conclusively  be  answered 
in  the  negative  the  discussion  is  ended.  Legal  pro- 
ceedings invariably  center  around  some  form  of  a 
proposition  of  fact.  In  the  criminal  court  a  man 
to  prove  his  innocence  has  only  to  establish  an 
alibi  or  prove  physical  inability  to  commit  the 
crime  with  which  he  is  charged.  Not  always,  of 
course,  does  the  question  of  possibility  constitute 
an  issue,  since  frequently  the  possibility  is  admit- 
ted. Such  would  be  the  case  if  the  following 
propositions  came  up  for  discussion:  "Joan  of 
Arc  was  burned  at  the  stake  " ;  "  Nero  was  guilty 
of  burning  Rome.''  In  these  instances  possibility 
gives  way  to  probability. 

70 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

2.  Does  the  proposition  state  a  probable  truth? 
If  the  question  of  possibility  has  been  answered 
affirmatively  or  inconclusively,  the  issue  of  proba- 
bility next  arises.  In  connection  with  many  prop- 
ositions of  fact  this  is  the  most  important  issue  to 
be  encountered.  Unless  a  condition  or  an  event 
—  its  possibility  being  admitted  —  can  be  affirmed 
or  denied  by  reliable  witnesses  who  testify  from 
their  own  personal  knowledge  of  the  matter,  the 
most  that  any  arguer  can  do  is  to  establish  a  balance 
of  probability.  Those  who  believe  that  Bacon 
wrote  the  plays  attributed  to  Shakespeare  try  to 
show  how  improbable  it  is  that  a  man  like  Shake- 
speare could  have  produced  such  works,  and  how 
very  Hkely  it  is  that  Bacon  was  the  real  author. 
Many  criminals  are  convicted  or  acquitted  on  evi- 
dence that  establishes  merely  a  strong  probability 
of  guilt  or  of  innocence. 

3.  Is  there  any  direct  evidence  bearing  on  the 
proposition?  In  the  third  place,  a  person  who  is 
trying  to  prove  or  disprove  a  proposition  of  fact 
must  consider  the  direct  evidence  involved.  Indi' 
rect  evidence  tends  to  establish  the  possibility  or 
probability  that  a  statement  is  true  or  false,  while 
direct  evidence  asserts  that  it  is  true  or  false.  Di- 
rect evidence  on  the  question,  "  Country  roads  in 

71 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

New  England  are  inferior  to  those  of  the  Middle 
West,"  would  not  be  a  description  of  the  topo- 
graphical and  geographical  features  of  both  re- 
gions, for  this  information  could  at  its  best  estab- 
lish only  a  strong  probability;  direct  evidence  on 
this  subject  would  be  the  testimony  of  people  who 
have  investigated  the  roads,  and  could  thus  speak 
from  direct  personal  knowledge. 

This  issue  of  direct  evidence  has  two  phases. 
The  arguer  must  ask,  "  Is  any  direct  evidence 
available?"  and  "If  there  is  any,  what  is  its 
value  ?  "  It  is  easily  seen  that  not  all  evidence  is 
equally  reliable.  Both  the  man  and  what  he  says 
must  be  tested :  the  man  for  such  qualities  as  truth- 
fulness, intelligence,  and  experience;  the  statements 
for  consistency  and  general  credibility.  The  tests 
of  evidence  are  given  in  detail  in  another  chapter. 

TESTS  FOR  ISSUES 

After  an  arguer  has  secured  his  list  of  issues,  he 
should  test  his  work  by  asking  the  four  following 
questions : 

I.  Does  each  issue  really  bear  upon  the  proposi- 
tion? 

2.,  Is  each  issue  a  subdivision  of  the  proposition, 
72 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

or  is  it  the  proposition  itself  formulated  in  differ- 
ent language? 

3.  Does  each  issue  comprise  only  disputed  mat- 
ter? 

4.  Do  the  issues,  taken  collectively,  consider  all 
phases  of  the  proposition? 

At  this  place  it  may  be  well  to  point  out  that 
although  issues  have  been  defined  as  questions,  they 
are  by  no  means  always  worded  as  such  in  either 
written  or  spoken  discourse.  The  issues  may  be 
expressed  in  almost  any  construction:  oftentimes 
they  appear  in  the  form  of  indirect  questions;  fre- 
quently they  are  cast  into  the  form  of  statements 
that  the  arguer  will  attempt  to  prove.  Several  il- 
lustrations will  show  more  plainly  just  what  issues 
are  and  how  they  are  brought  into  the  introduction : 

THE  RECALL  OF  JUDGES 

The  recall  of  judgment  is  a  principle  in  the  science  of 
government  that  has  never  received  the  test  of  actual  trial 
and  its  beneficial  or  pernicious  influence  rests  upon  specula- 
tive reasoning  rather  than  upon  facts  to  be  gathered 
from  experience. 

The  Federal  Constitution  provides : 

"  The  United  States  shall  guarantee  to  every  State  In  this 
Union  a  republican  form  of  government." 

The  questions  which  present  themselves  are:  First,  is 
the  independence  of  the  judiciary  one  of  the  necessary  and 
essential  elements  of  a  republican  form  of  government? 

73 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

And,  secondly,  is  the  proposed  recall  of  the  judges,  with- 
out charges  against  them  preferred,  without  trial  or  evi- 
dence, and  without  cause,  other  than  the  mere  will  of  the' 
majority  of  the  electorate,  that  is  to  say,  the  dominant  party, 
destructive  of  their  independence? 

If  these  questions  are  answered  in  the  affirmative,  it 
would  seem  to  follow  that  the  principles  contended  for 
would  be  within  the  inhibition  of  the  section  quoted  above.* 

THE  DARTMOUTH  COLLEGE  CASE 

It  will  be  contended  by  the  plaintiffs,  that  these  acts  are 
not  valid  and  binding  on  them,  without  their  assent, 

1.  Because  they  are  against  common  rights,  and  the  Con- 
stitution of  New  Hampshire. 

2.  Because  they  are  repugnant  to  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States.^ 

SOME  PROBLEMS  OF  PUBLIC  OWNERSHIP 

The  question  of  the  public  ownership  of  those  commun- 
ity services  which  are  commonly  grouped  together  under 
the  title  of  "public  utilities"  is  one  which  affects  the  in- 
dividual in  many  ways.  As  a  member  of  the  community 
he  is  interested  in  the  social  effects  of  an  assumption  of  an 
industrial  undertaking  by  the  State,  as  a  citizen  he  is  in- 
terested in  the  way  in  which  this  extension  of  governmental 
functions  would  affect  the  political  organization  of  the 
State,  and  as  a  taxpayer  and  a  user  of  service  he  is  directly 
interested  financially  in  the  success  or  failure  of  the  un- 
dertaking. 

The  problem  must  be  discussed  along  broad  economic 
lines  and  falls  naturally  into  three  main  divisions  —  the 
social,  political,  and  financial  effects  of  such  an  assumption 
of  business  undertakings  by  the  State.^ 

4  North  American  Review,   193:672. 

5  Daniel  Webster, 

6  Walter  S.  Allen,  North  American  Review,   197:8. 

74 


The  Introduction — Conviction 


PARTITION 

In  college  debate,  though  not  frequently  else- 
where, the  issues  as  a  rule  are  immediately  fol- 
lowed by  a  series  of  statements  that  show  how  each 
issue  is  to  be  answered.  These  statements  consti- 
tute an  outline  of  the  discussion  and  are  known  as 
the  partition.  When  a  partition  is  made,  each 
statement  becomes  a  main  point  to  be  established 
by  proof  in  the  discussion. 

There  are  several  forms  in  which  the  partition 
may  be  expressed:  it  may  consist  of  a  single  sen- 
tence that  indicates  how  the  issues  are  to  be  an- 
swered; it  may  consist  of  the  issues  themselves 
turned  into  declarative  sentences  so  that  they  read 
in  favor  of  the  side  being  upheld;  or  it  may  an- 
swer each  issue  by  means  of  several  statements. 
The  following  will  illustrate  the  several  methods : 

Proposition:  Resolved,  That  College  should 

adopt  the  honor  system. 
Issues:  i.  How  would  the  honor  system  affect  the 

students  individually? 
2.  How  would  the  honor  system  affect  the 

college  as  a  whole? 


75 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

Partition  (affirmative)  : 
First  method. 

I.  We  will  establish  our  side  of  the  arg-u- 
nient  by  proving  that 'in  each  case  the 
honor  system  would  be  a  benefit. 

Second  method. 

1.  The  honor  system  would  benefit  the  stu- 

dents individually. 

2.  The  honor  system  would  benefit  the  col- 

lege as  a  whole. 

Third  method. 

1.  The  honor  system  would  benefit  the  stu- 

dents morally. 

2.  The  honor  system  would  benefit  the  stu- 

dents intellectually. 

3.  The     honor     system     would     produce 

greater     harmony     between     students 
and  faculty. 

4.  The  honor  system  would  advertise  the 

college. 

The  partition  is  usually  found  in  college  debate 
because  in  a  contest  of  this  sort  absolute  clearness 
is  a  prerequisite  for  success.  As  but  little  interest 
may  center  around  the  subject  itself,  each  debater 

76 


The  Introduction— Conviction 

knows  that  if  he  is  to  make  any  impression  on  the 
audience  he  must  so  arrange  his  argument  that  it 
will,  with  a  minimum  amount  of  effort  on  the  part 
of  the  listener,  be  clear  to  every  one.  To  one  read- 
ing an  argument,  a  partition,  unless  of  the  simplest 
kind,  will  probably  seem  superfluous ;  to  one  listen- 
ing to  a  speech  in  which  he  is  truly  interested,  the 
partition  may  seem  labored.  But  when  the  whole 
interest  centers  in  the  method  of  presentation,  and 
in  the  processes  of  reasoning  rather  than  in  the  sub' 
ject  matter,  the  partition  does  increase  the  clearness 
of  the  argument,  and  should,  therefore,  be  used. 

Summary.  The  work  of  conviction  in  the  intro- 
duction, is  to  show  the  relation  between  the  propo- 
sition and  the  proof.  The  arguer  accomplishes  this 
task  (i)  by  defining  each  word  the  meaning  of 
which  is  not  generally  comprehended;  (2)  by  ex- 
plaining, in  the  light  of  these  definitions,  the  mean- 
ing of  the  proposition  taken  as  a  whole;  (3)  by 
discovering  the  issues  through  a  careful  process  of 
analysis ;  and  (4)  by  making  a  partition  when  he  is 
engaged  in  debate  and  has  reason  to  think  that  the 
audience  will  not  see  the  connection  between  the  is- 
sues and  the  discussion. 


77 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

HOW  TO  INVESTIGATE  A  SUBJECT 

A  student  will  hardly  have  reached  this  point  in 
the  study  of  Argumentation  before  finding  it  neces- 
sary to  search  for  information  that  will  assist  him 
in  the  construction  of  his  argument.  To  one  un- 
familiar with  a  library,  a  search  after  facts  bearing 
upon  a  given  subject  is  likely  to  prove  tedious. 
For  this  reason  a  few  words  of  advice  concerning 
the  proper  way  in  which  to  use  a  library  may  be  of 
great  help  to  a  beginner.  Nothing,  however,  can 
be  given  here  that  will  even  approximate  the  value 
of  a  few  hours'  instruction  by  the  librarian  of  the 
college  in  which  the  student  is  enrolled.  In  the 
absence  of  such  instruction,  one  can  seldom  do  better 
at  the  outset  than  to  become  familiar  with  indexes  to 
periodical  and  contemporary  Hterature,  encyclope- 
dias, government  reports,  and  the  library  catalogue. 

The  best  indexes  are  the  Reader's  Guide,  Poole's 
Index,  the  Annual  Library  Index,  and  the  Current 
Events  Index.  These  give  references  to  all  articles 
published  in  the  principal  magazines  and  newspapers 
for  many  years.  In  these  articles  one  will  find  al- 
most limitless  material  on  nearly  every  popular  topic 
of  the  day  —  political,  economic,  scientific,  social, 
educational.     The  writers,  too,  are  often  of  national 

78 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

and  even  of  international  reputation,  and  the  opin- 
ions and  ideas  given  here  are  frequently  as  v\^eighty 
and  progressive  as  can  be  found.  In  searching 
through  an  index  for  articles  upon  a  certain  subject, 
one  should  invariably  look  under  several  headings. 
For  example,  if  one  is  seeking  material  in  regard  to 
firearms,  he  should  consult  several  terms,  such  as 
rifle,  shotgun,  cannon,  howitzer,  ordnance. 

Just  what  publications  will  be  most  serviceable 
it  is  hard  to  say.  For  strictly  current  topics,  maga- 
zines like  the  Review  of  Reviews,  the  Independent, 
the  Outlook,  the  Literary  Digest,  and  the  World's 
Work  are  generally  considered  exceptionally  useful. 
The  North  American  Review  and  the  Forum  as  a 
rule  contain  articles  of  less  news  value  but  perhaps 
of  greater  import.  Practically  all  periodicals,  ex- 
cept those  devoted  solely  to  fiction,  print  special  ar- 
ticles that  an  investigator  should  read  if  reference 
is  made  to  them  in  the  index  he  consults.  One  word 
of  caution  in  regard  to  the  value  of  editorials :  their 
worth  depends  entirely  upon  the  reputation  of  the 
publication  for  unbiased,  discriminating  judgment 
and  sound  principles. 

In  estimating  the  worth  of  signed  articles,  one 
must  consider  both  the  character  of  the  periodical 
and  the  standing  of  the  writer.     For  the  latter  pur- 

79 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

pose  books  of  biographical  reference  like  Who's 
Who  in  America  are  indispensable.  This  contains 
the  names  of  tb.e  prominent  men  in  the  United 
States  and  brief  biographies  setting  forth  the  posi- 
tions they  have  held,  the  work  they  have  done,  and 
the  honors  they  have  received.  The  student  should 
consult  this  book  every  time  he  reads  an  article 
written  by  a  living  American  author  with  whom  he 
is  not  familiar.  Similar  books  are  published  for 
England,  Germany,  France,  Japan,  the  Far  East, 
New  York  City,  Pennsylvania,  and  the  women  of  the 
United  States  and  Canada. 

Other  valuable  sources  of  information  are  ency- 
clopedias. They  often  give  broad  surveys  and  com- 
prehensive digests  that  cannot  readily  be  found 
elsewhere.  Although  they  do  not,  as  a  rule,  discuss 
subjects  that  are  of  mere  local  or  present-day 
interest,  yet  the  thorough  searcher  after  evidence 
will  usually  do  well  to  consult  at  least  several.  A 
fact  w^orth  bearing  in  mind  is  that  in  connection  with 
these  articles  in  encyclopedias  references  are  often 
given  to  books  and  articles  that  treat  the  subject 
ver}'  thoroughly. 

In  the  next  place,  official  publications  frequently 
furnish  invaluable  help  in  regard  to  public  problems. 
Both  State  governments  and  the  national  govern- 

80 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

ment  constantly  publish  reports  containing  statistics, 
the  opinions  of  experts,  and  suggestions  for  eco- 
nomic and  political  changes.  Some  of  the  most  val- 
uable of  these  documents  for  the  purposes  of  the 
arguer  are  Census,  Immigration,  Education,  and 
Interstate  Commerce  Commission  reports,  the  mes- 
sages of  the  Presidents,  and  the  Congressional  Rec- 
ord, There  are  indexes  to  all  these,  and  one  can 
easily  find  out  how  to  use  them.. 

Furthennore,  one  should  not  fail  to  consult  the 
library  catalogue.  To  be  sure,  if  the  books  are 
catalogued  only  according  to  titles  and  authors,  one 
will  probably  get  little  assistance  from  this  source 
unless  he  knows  beforehand  what  particular  books 
or  authors  to  search  for.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
books  are  also  catalogued  according  to  the  subjects 
of  which  they  treat,  one  can  see  ahuost  at  a  glance 
what  books  the  library  has  that  bear  upon  the  matter 
under  investigation. 

EXERCISES 

A.    Definition  of  Terms. 

1.  Define  by  authority:  copyright,  curfew  law,  dramatic 
unities,  equipment  bonds,  indemnity,  industrial  education, 
monotheism,  neutrality,  protective  tariff,  single-tax  system. 

2.  Define  by  illustration:  crop  rotation,  forest  reserve, 
free  trade,  government  by  commission,  monopoly,  ravvr  ma- 
terials, referendum^,  sonnet,  subsidy/,  watered  stock. 

8i 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

3.  Define  by  both  authority  and  illustyation:  balance  of 
power,  budget  system  of  expenditures,  contraband  of  war. 
Federal  reserve  bank,  militarism,  naturalization,  short  bal- 
lot, socialism,  treaty  obligations,  unearned  increment. 

B.  Criticize  the  issues  that  are  given  for  the  following 
propositions : 

1.  Resolved,  That  letter  postage  should  be  reduced  to  a 
one-cent  rate. 

a.  How  would  one-cent  postage  affect  the  country  eco- 

nomically? 

b.  How  would  one-cent  postage  affect  the  country  so- 

cially? 

c.  How  would  one-cent  postage  affect  the  country  intel- 

lectually? 

2.  Resolved,  That  the  New  York  legislature  should  estab- 
lish a  maximum  eight-hour  working  day  for  all  occupa- 
tions. 

a.  Is  a  ten-hour  day  too  long? 

b.  Is  an  eight-hour  day  practicable? 

c.  Would  a  change  be  wise? 

3.  Resolved,  That  the  Federal  government  should  acquire 
and  operate  the  telegraph  systems  in  the  United  States. 

a.  Is  government  ownership  desirable? 

b.  Does  the  present  system  contain  serious  evils? 

c.  Will  the  proposed  plan  benefit  the  people? 

4.  Resolved,  That  all  states  should  abolish  the  jury  sys- 
tem. 

a.  Is  a  judge  or  a  jury  better  qualified  to  render  a  ver- 

dict? 

b.  Should  two-thirds  of  a  jury  be  allowed  to  render 

a  decision? 

c.  Does  the  present  system  contain  serious  evils? 

d.  If  it  does  contain  serious  evils,  will  the  proposed 

system  rem.ove  them? 

e.  Is  the  plan  practicable? 

82 


The  Introduction — Conviction 

5.  Resolved,  That  labor  unions  are  detrimental  to  the 
working  man. 

a.  Hov/  do  unions  affect  the  country  as  a  whole? 

b.  Do  unions  benefit  the  laborer? 

c.  Do  unions  benefit  the  employer  ? 

d.  Do  unions  seek  to  raise  wages  ? 

6.  Resolved,  That  capital  punishment  should  be  abolished. 

a.  Is  capital  punishment  in  accordance  with  the  teach- 

ings of  the  Christian  religion? 

b.  Is  it  a  just  punishment? 

c.  Does  it  cause  the  criminal  to  reform? 

C.    Write  introductions  to  the  following  propositions : 

1.  The  writings  of  "  O.  Henry"  have  permanent  literary 
value. 

2.  Germany  was  justified  in  invading  Belgium. 

3.  The  South  should  raise  a  diversification  of  crops. 

4.  The  United  States  navy  should  be  greatly  increased. 

5.  American  colleges  should  establish  the  fully  elective 
system  of  studies. 

6.  A  commission  form  of  government  is  preferable  to  a 
mayor  and  council  plan. 

7.  The  Yosemite  was  formed  by  glaciation. 

8.  For  factories  reinforced  concrete  is   superior  to  the 
cement  block  style  of  architecture. 


83 


CHAPTER  V 

THE  INTRODUCTON  — BRIEF- 
DRAWING 

Preceding  chapters  have  dwelt  on  the  essential 
characteristics  of  the  introduction  and  have  shown 
what  it  should  be  like  when  completed.  No  one 
but  an  expert  writer,  however,  can  hope  that  his 
argument,  in  either  introduction,  discussion,  or  con- 
clusion, will  attain  any  considerable  completeness 
and  excellence  without  first  passing  through  a  pre- 
liminary form  known  as  the  brief. 

A  brief  is  a  special  kind  of  outline :  it  is  an  outline 
that  sets  forth  in  specific  language  all  the  ideas  to 
be  used  in  that  portion  of  the  argument  kiiozun  as 
conviction,  and  that  shows  the  exact  relation  these 
ideas  bear  to.  each  other  and  to  the  proposition. 
An  outline  in  narrative,  descriptive,  or  expository 
composition  is  invariably  made  up  of  general  sug- 
gestions, w^hich  seldom  indicate  the  same  ideas  to 
different  persons ;  it  is  inexact  and  incomplete.  A 
brief,  on  the  contrary,  fails  in  its  purpose  unless 

84 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

it  conveys  accurate  information.  The  material 
composing  it  is  always  in  the  form  of  complete  sen- 
tences; the  ideas  are  expressed  in  as  exact  and 
specific  language  as  the  writer  is  capable  of  using. 
A  good  brief  means  as  much  to  the  one  who  reads  it 
as  to  the  one  who  draws  it.  It  is,  too,  a  complete 
work  in  itself.  It  does  not  deal  with  persuasion; 
with  this  exception,  however,  it  contains  in  con- 
densed form  all  the  material  to  be  used  in  the 
finished  argument. 

There  are  many  reasons  why  an  arguer  should 
first  cast  his  material  in  the  form  of  a  brief.  To 
begin  with,  this  device  enables  him  to  grasp,  almost 
at  a  glance,  all  the  material  used  for  the  purpose 
of  conviction;  it  keeps  constantly  before  him  the 
points  that  he  must  explain,  and  shows  him  instantly 
just  how  far  he  has  progressed  with  the  proof  of 
each  statement.  Furthermore,  a  brief  renders  the 
arguer  invaluable  assistance  in  preserving  the  fun- 
damental principles  of  composition,  especially  those 
of  Unity,  Coherence,  Proportion,  and  Emphasis. 
It  greatly  simplifies  his  task  of  assorting  material 
and  assigning  each  part  its  proper  place  and  func- 
tion. It  exhibits  so  clearly  every  particle  of  evi- 
dence and  every  process  of  reasoning  employed 
that  it  affords  great  convenience  for  testing  both 

8s 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

the  quality  and  the  quantity  of  the  proof.  In  fact, 
a  good  brief  is  so  essential  a  part  of  a  good 
argument  that  a  student  who  neglects  to  draw  the 
first  is  doomed  to  meet  failure  in  the  second. 

The  rules  governing  brief-drawing  logically  divide 
themselves  into  four  classes:  those  which  apply  to 
the  brief  as  a  whole  constitute  the  first  class  and  are 
called  General  Rules ;  those  rules  which  apply  to  each 
of  the  main  divisions  of  a  brief  constitute  the  three 
remaining  classes  and  are  called  Rules  for  the  In- 
troduction, Rules  for  the  Discussion,  and  Rules  for 
the  Conclusion. 


GENERAL  RULES 

In  drawing  a  brief,  the  student  should  first  divide 
his  material  into  three  groups,  corresponding  to  the 
three  divisions  of  the  complete  argument:  the  In- 
troduction, Discussion,  and  Conclusion.  Moreover, 
since  absolute  clearness  in  every  particular  is  the 
prime  requisite  for  a  good  brief,  he  should  label 
each  of  these  parts  with  its  proper  name,  so  that 
there  may  never  be  the  slightest  doubt  or  confusion 
as  to  where  one  part  ends  and  another  begins. 
Hence  the  first  rule  for  brief-drawing  is: 

Rule  I.  Divide  the  brief  into  three  parts,  and 
86 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

mark  them  respectively.  Introduction,  Discussion, 
and  Conclusion. 

A  brief,  as  has  been  explained,  is  an  outline  that 
contains  all  the  reasoning  to  be  found  in  the  finished 
argument.  Reasoning  processes  are  carried  on,  not 
with  vague  ideas  and  general  suggestions,  but  with 
specific  facts  and  exact  thoughts.  For  this  reason, 
only  complete  statements  are  of  value  in  a  brief. 
Mere  terms  must  be  avoided.  A  statement,  it 
should  be  remembered,  is  a  declarative  sentence; 
a  term  is  a  word  or  any  combination  of  words  other 
than  a  sentence. 

The  following  examples  of  terms  plainly  show 
that  no  reasoning  process  can  exist  without  the  use 
of  complete  statements : 

The  maximum  size  of  the  United  States  army. 

The  present  size  of  the  army. 

The  ratio  between  the  army  and  the  population  of 
the  United  States. 

Since  such  expressions  as  these  give  no  informa- 
tion, they  are  manifestly  out  of  place  in  a  brief. 
Each  term  may  call  to  mind  any  one  of  several  ideas. 
No  one  but  tlie  author  knows  whether  the  first  term 
is  intended  to  indicate  that  the  maximum  size  of 
the  army  is  too  great  or  too  small,  and  he  even  neg- 
lects to  state  what  the  size  is.    The  second  term 

87 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

does  not  indicate  whether  the  present  size  is  the 
same  as  the  maximum  size,  or  whether  the  size  of 
the  army  should  be  increased  or  decreased.  The 
third  term  is  equally  indefinite.  Notice,  however, 
that  as  soon  as  these  terms  are  turned  into  complete 
sentences,  they  may  well  serve  as  explanation  or 
proof : 

Under  existing  law  the  United  States  army  must 
not  exceed  100,000  enlisted  men. 

At  present  the  army  falls  a  good  many  thousands 
short  of  the  maximum. 

There  are  less  than  a  thousand  soldiers  for  every 
million  of  inhabitants  in  the  United  States  and  the 
insular  possessions. 

This  explanation  gives  rise  to  the  following  rule : 

Rule  II.  Express  each  idea  in  the  brief  in  the 
form  of  a  complete  statement. 

Moreover,  each  sentence  should  contain  only  one 
idea.  Every  thought  expressed  has  some  specific 
work  to  do,  and  it  can  do  it  far  more  effectively 
if  it  stands  by  itself  as  a  unit.  The  awkwardness 
and  impracticability  of  proving  the  truth  or  falsity 
of  a  statement  that  makes  several  assertions  has 
been  treated  under  the  head  of  Combined  Proposi- 
tions. Obviously,  there  are  insurmountable  difficul- 
ties in  grouping  explanation  or  proof  about  such 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

a  statement  as,  ''  Municipal  ownership  has  failed 
in  Philadelphia,  has  succeeded  in  Edinburgh,  and 
is  likely  to  meet  with  indifferent  success  in  New 
Orleans."  Furthermore,  a  sentence  that  contains 
several  distinct  thoughts  is  very  ineffective  as  proof 
for  some  other  statement.  Since  one  part  of  the 
sentence  may  be  accepted  as  true  and  another  part 
rejected,  the  resulting  confusion  is  very  great.  To 
avoid  all  errors  of  this  kind,  the  student  should 
use,  as  far  as  possible,  only  simple  sentences. 

Rule  III.  Make  in  each  statement  only  a  single 
assertion. 

In  the  next  place,  one  who  draws  a  brief  should 
take  pains  to  frame  all  his  statements  in  as  concise 
a  form  as  he  can.  If  he  is  able  to  state  an  idea  in 
six  words,  he  should  not  use  seven.  This  principle 
does  not  mean  that  small  words  like  a,  an,  and  the 
should  be  left  out,  or  that  an  obvious  subject  may 
be  omitted;  it  does  not  mean  that  the  "diary" 
style  of  writing  is  permissible,  or  that  abbreviations 
and  contractions  may  be  used.  It  simply  means 
that  one  should  always  state  his  ideas  as  briefly  as 
possible  without  violating  any  of  the  rules  of  Com- 
position. Quotations  should  rarely  appear  in  a 
brief,  never  unless  they  are  very  short.  When 
an  arguer  wishes  to  make  use  of  another  writer's 

89 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

material,  he  should  condense  it  into  his  own  lan- 
guage, and  state  from  what  source  he  derived  his 
information.  In  an  expanded  argument  the  full 
quotation  may  appear.  The  ability  to  express  ideas 
both  concisely  and,  at  the  same  time,  clearly,  is  at- 
tained only  by  considerable  labor,  yet  a  departure 
from  the  principle  of  brevity  is  a  serious  violation  of 
good  brief-drawing.     Hence  the  rule : 

Riile  IV.  Make  each  statement  as  concise  as  is 
consistent  with  clearness. 

Every  brief  is  primarily  a  process  of  explanation. 
From  this  fact  it  is  evident  that  clearness  must 
be  sought  above  all  other  qualities.  Not  only  must 
the  idea  expressed  be  understood,  but  the  relation 
between  ideas  must  be  perfectly  plain  and  evident. 
The  reader  should  be  able  to  see  at  a  glance  what 
material  is  of  co-ordinate  rank  and  what  is  of  sub- 
ordinate rank.  This  perspicuity  is  especially  neces- 
sary in  the  discussion,  where  each  statement  is 
either  being  proved  by  subordinate  statements  or  is 
serving  as  proof  for  some  other  statement.  The 
device  ordinarily  adopted  for  exhibiting  at  a  glance 
the  relation  betw^een  the  ideas  in  a  brief  consists 
of  two  parts:  first,  all  subordinate  statements  are 
indented  farther  than  more  important  statements; 

90 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

and  second,  numbers  and  letters  are  used  to  in- 
dicate what  statements  are  of  co-ordinate  importance 
and  what  are  of  secondary  rank.  The  system  of 
marking  most  generally  adopted  is  as  follows : 

I. 


1. 


1'. 


a'. 


B. 


11. 

A.  etc.^ 

Thus  the  fifth  rule  is: 

Rule  V.  Indicate  the  relation  between  statements 
by  indentation  and  by  the  use  of  symbols. 

In  indicating  the  relation  between  ideas,  a  writer 
should  never  put  more  than  one  symbol  before  a 
statement.  It  seems  almost  superfluous  to  mention 
an  error  so  apparent  as  the  double  use  of  symbols, 
but  the  mistake  is  frequently  made  and  much  con- 

1  See  briefs  on  pp.  94-98,  172-183. 
91 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

fusion  results.  The  numeral  I  before  a  heading 
indicates  that  the  statement  is  of  primary  impor- 
tance; the  letter  A  indicates  that  it  is  of  secondary 
importance.  If  a  statement  is  marked  L'V,  appar- 
ently it  is  both  primary  and  secondary,  clearly  an 
impossibility. 

Rule  VI.  Mark  each  statement  zdth  only  one 
symbol. 

RULES  FOR  THE  INTRODUCTION 

It  has  been  seen  that  a  brief  is  a  complete  compo- 
sition in  itself,  embodying  all  the  material  for  con- 
viction that  will  later  be  found  in  the  expanded 
argument.  The  introduction,  therefore,  must  con- 
tain sufficient  information  to  make  the  proof  of  the 
proposition  perfectly  clear.  This  portion  of  the 
brief  serves  as  a  connecting  link  between  the  prop- 
osition and  the  discussion;  it  must  explain  the 
nature  of  the  proposition  and  then  show  how  the 
proof  which  is  to  follow  applies  to  it.  The  exact 
work  that  the  introduction  to  a  brief  must  perform 
is  stated  in  the  following  rule : 

Rule  VII.     Put  into  the  introduction  sitfHcient 
explanation  for  a  complete  understanding   of  the 
discussion.     This  explanation  usually  involves: 
(a)  a  definition  of  terms, 
92 


The  Introduction— Brief-Drawing 

(b)  an  explanation  of  the  meaning  of  the 
proposition, 

(c)  a  statement  of  the  issuesy  and 

(d)  the  partition. 

Neither  an  introduction  to  a  brief  nor  an  introduc- 
tion to  a  complete  argument  should  contain  any 
statements  not  admitted  by  both  sides.  All  ideas 
that  savor  of  controversy  or  prejudice  have  no  place 
in  an  introduction.  The  sole  purpose  of  the  in- 
troduction is  to  prepare  the  way  for  the  discussion ; 
if  it  contains  anything  in  the  nature  of  proof,  any- 
thing which  is  not  admittedly  true,  it  is  no  longer 
pure  introduction,  but  becomes  in  part  discussion. 
If  explanation  and  proof  are  thus  thrown  together 
indiscriminately,  confusion  will  result.  Accordingly 
the  following  rule  is  of  great  importance : 

Rule  VIII.  Put  into  the  introduction  only  state- 
ments admitted  by  both  sides. 

The  following  introductions  to  briefs  may  well 
serve  as  models  for  student's  work : 

FIRST     MODEL 

Resolved,  That  the  Federal  government  should 
acquire  and  operate  the  railroads  in  the  United 
States. 

93 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

AlJirmative  Brief 

INTRODUCTION 

I.     The  railroad  situation  in  the  United   States 
presents  an  important  problem,  because 

A.  Many  abuses  are  believed  to  exist. 

B.  Many  roads  have  gone  bankrupt. 

C.  The  railroad  is  an  important  element  in 

every  phase  of  modern  industry. 
II.     The  railroads  in  the  United  States  proper  are 
owned  and  operated  by  private  capital,  sub- 
ject to  State  and  Federal  control. 

A.  State   control   is   effected   through    State 

laws  and  State  commissions. 
I.     Some  States  fix  the  rates  for  railroad 
service  and  prescribe  conditions  of 
train  operation  within  their  borders. 

B.  Federal  control  is  effected  through  the  In- 

terstate Commerce  Commission. 

1.  This    commission    practically    deter- 

mines all  ntes  for  interstate  traffic. 

2.  It  compels  the  roads  to  adopt  a  uni- 

form method  of  accounting. 

3.  It  prescribes  many  conditions  of  train 

operation,  the  use  of  safety  devices, 
etc. 

94 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

III.  The  proposed  system  would  remove  the  rail- 

roads entirely  from  the  hands  of  private 
enterprise  and  invest  their  ownership  and 
operation  in  the  Federal  government. 

IV,  To  determine  whether  private  ownership  or 

government     ownership     of     railroads     is 
preferable,  the  following  questions  must  be 
answered : 
^     A.     Does  the  present  system  contain  serious 
evils  ? 

B.  Would  the  proposed  system  remove  these 

evils  ? 

C.  Would  the  proposed  system  bring  in  new 

evils? 

D.  Is  the  plan  theoretically  practicable  ? 

E.  What  has  been  the  experience  of  other 

countries  ? 
V.     The  affirmative  will  prove  that  the  United 
States  should  adopt  government  ownership 
for  the  following  reasons : 

A.  Private  ownership  of  railroads  gives  rise 

to  serious  evils. 

B.  Government    ownership    would    remove 

these  evils. 

C.  Government  ownership  would  not  bring 

in  new  evils. 

95 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

D.  Government    ownership    is    theoretically 

practicable. 

E.  The   experience   of   countries   that   have 

government  ownership  is  in   favor  of 
this  system. 

SECOND  MODEL 

Resolved,  That  College  should  adopt  the 

honor  system  of  holding  examinations.  ^ 

Negative  Brief 

INTRODUCTION 

I.     Two   methods   of   holding   examinations   are 
under   consideration :    the    proctor    system 
and  the  honor  system. 
11.     These  two  systems  may  be  described  as  fol- 
lows : 
A.     The    proctor    system    has   the    following 
characteristics : 

1.  During  examinations  college  officers 

watch  the  students. 

2.  Students  are  not  generally  allowed  to 

leave  the  examination   room   until 
they  have  finished  their  work. 

3.  If  the  officers  discover  any  cheating, 

the  offender  is  punished  by  the  col- 
lege faculty. 
96 


The  Introduction- — Brief-Drawing 

4.     The  customary  penalty  is  expulsion  or 
suspension    from    college    for   one 
year. 
B.     The  honor  system  has  these  characteris- 
tics: 

1.  Students  are  not  watched  by  any  mem- 

ber of  the  college  faculty  during  ex- 
aminations. 

2.  Sometimes  an  instructor  is  in  the  ex- 

amination room  for  the  purpose  of 
answering  questions. 

3.  Students  may  leave  the  room  at  will. 

4.  At  the  close  of  the  examination  each 

student  signs  a  statement  to  the 
effect  that  he  has  neither  received 
nor  given  any  help  during  the  ex- 
amination. 

5.  A  student  board  sits  in  judgment  on 

any  student  reported  by  another 
student  as  having  cheated. 

6.  Students  convicted  of  cheating  are  re- 

quired to  leave  college. 
III.     The  real  question  to  be  answered  is,  Should 
the   honor  system  be   substituted   for  the 
proctor  system? 
A.     The  comparative  value  of   each   system 
97 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

must  be  judged  by  the  following  stand- 
ards: 

1.  Under  which  system  will  the  student 

get  the  better  education  ? 

2.  Under  which  system  will  the  student 

get  the  better  moral  training  ? 

3.  Which  system  will  promote  the  bet- 

ter feeling  betwee^  faculty  and  stu- 
dents ? 

4.  Which  system  will  give  the  college  the 

better  reputation? 
IV.     The  negative  will  prove  that  in  each  instance 
the  proctor  system  is  to  be  preferred. 

EXERCISES 

A.  Write  introductions  to  briefs  on  the  propositions 
found  on  page  83. 

B.  Put  the  following  introduction  to  an  argument  into 
brief  form: 

THE  MONROE  DOCTRINE 

"  The  American  continents,  by  the  free  and  independent 
condition  which  they  have  assumed  and  maintain,  are  hence- 
forth not  to  be  considered  as  subjects  for  future  coloniza- 
tion by  European  powers.  .  .  .  We  should  consider  ayiy  at- 
tempt on  their  part  to  extend  their  system  to  any  portion  of 
this  hemisphere  as  dangerous  to  our  peace  and  safety. 
With  the  existing  colonies  or  dependencies  of  any  European 
power,  we  have  not  interfered  and  shall  not  interfere.  But 
with  the  governments  who  have  declared  their  independ' 

98 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

ence,  and  maintained  it,  and  whose  independence  we  have, 
on  great  consideration,  and  on  just  principles,  acknozvl- 
edged,  we  could  not  view  any  interposition  for  the  purpose 
of  oppressing  them,  or  controlling,  in  any  other  manner, 
their  destiny,  by  any  Euro  peon  power,  in  any  other  light 
than  as  the  manifestation  of  an  unfriendly  disposition  to- 
wards the  United  States.  .  .   '' 

Thus,  in  1823,  did  President  James  Monroe,  acting  under 
the  influence  of  his  able  Secretary  of  State,  John  Quincy 
Adams,  enunciate  a  doctrine  which  has  been  the  most  uni- 
versally accepted  foreign  policy  that  we  have  ever  had. 
No  one  questions  the  fact  that  the  enunciation  of  this  policy 
of  "America  for  Americans,"  and  our  firm  adherence  to  it 
for  so  many  years,  has  had  a  very  decided  effect  upon  the 
history  of  the  Western  Hemisphere. 

There  have  been  times  when  ambitious  European  mon- 
archs  would  have  liked  nothing  better  than  to  help  them- 
selves to  poorly  defended  territory  in  what  is  now  termed 
Latin  America.  Had  it  not  been  for  the  Monroe  Doctrine, 
the  American  republics  would  have  found  it  very  much 
more  difficult  to  maintain  their  independence  during  the 
first  three-quarters  of  a  century  of  their  career.  And  this 
notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  actual  words  "Monroe 
Doctrine  "  were  rarely  heard  or  seen. 

In  1845,  without  mentioning  this  shibboleth  by  name, 
President  Polk  declared  that  the  United  States  would  not 
permit  any  European  intervention  on  the  North  American 
continent.  This,  as  Professor  Coolidge  has  brought  out, 
pushed  the  theory  further  than  it  has  been  carried  out  in 
practice,  although  it  restricted  the  original  idea  by  leaving 
South  America  out  of  account. 

A  few  years  later,  while  we  were  engaged  in  civil  war, 
Napoleon  HI  attempted  to  set  up  a  European  monarch  in 
Mexico.  Scarcely  had  we  recovered,  however,  from  the 
throes  of  our  great  conflict,  when  Mr.  Seward  took  up  with 
the  French  government  the  necessity  for  the  withdrawal  of 

99 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

the  French  troops  from  Maximilian's  support.  Here  we 
were  acting  strongly  in  accordance  with  the  best  traditions 
of  the  Monroe  Doctrine,  and  yet  the  mysterious  words  were 
not  employed  in  tlie  correspondence. 

In  fact,  while  it  was  generally  understood  that  we  would 
not  countenance  any  European  interference  in  the  affairs 
of  North  and  South  America,  it  was  not  until  1895,  during 
the  second  administration  of  President  Cleveland,  that  a 
Secretary  of  State  thought  it  expedient  or  necessary  to 
restate  the  I^Ionroe  Doctrine  and  to  bring  us  to  the  verge 
of  a  European  war  by  backing  it  up  with  an  absolutely  un- 
compromising attitude.  Venezuela  had  had  a  long-standing 
boundary  dispute  with  British  Guiana.  Nobody  cared  very 
much  either  way  until  it  was  discovered  that  in  the  dis- 
puted territory  were  rich  gold  fields.  In  the  excitement 
which  ensued,  the  Venezuelans  appealed  to  the  United 
States,  and  Secretary  Olney,  invoking  the  Monroe  Doc- 
trine, brought  matters  to  a  crisis. 

Fortunately  for  us,  Lord  Salisbury  had  a  fairly  good 
sense  of  humor,  and  declined  to  take  the  matter  too 
seriously.  Instead  of  standing,  in  the  proverbial  British 
manner,  strictly  for  his  honor  and  his  rights,  he  politely 
ignored  the  Boundary  Commission  which  we  had  impetu- 
ously called  into  existence,  and,  dealing  directly  with  his 
neighbor  Venezuela,  arranged  for  an  international  court  of 
arbitration. 

Less  than  three  years  afterwards  we  were  at  war  with 
Spain.  The  progress  of  the  v.^ar  in  Cuba  and  the  Spanish 
colonies  was  followed  in  South  America  with  the  keenest 
interest. 

Our  neighbors  felt  that  a  decided  change  had  come  over 
the  Monroe  Doctrine !  In  1823  we  had  declared  that  "  with 
the  existing  colonies  or  dependencies  of  any  European 
power  we  have  not  interfered,  and  shall  not  interfere"  (so 
runs  the  original  Monroe  Doctrine).  In  1898  we  not  only 
interfered,  but  actually  took  away  all  of  Spain's  colonies 
100 


The  Introduction — Brief-Drawing 

and  dependencies,  freeing  Cuba  and  retaining  for  our- 
selves Porto  Rico,  Guam,  and  the  Philippines. 

In  1895  we  declare  that  we  are  practically  sovereign  on 
this  continent ;  in  1898  we  take  a  rich  American  island  from 
a  European  power,  and  in  1903  we  go  through  the  form  of 
preventing  a  South  American  republic  from  subduing  a 
revolution  in  one  of  her  distant  provinces,  and  eventually 
take  a  strip  of  that  province  because  we  beHeve  we  owe  it 
to  the  world  to  build  the  Panama  Canal. 

Furthermore,  we  intervened  in  Santo  Domingo.  Again, 
we  have  twice  landed  troops  in  Central  America  and  taken 
an  active  part  by  way  of  interfering  in  local  politics.  We 
believed  that  the  conditions  were  so  bad  as  to  justify  us  in 
carrying  out  the  Monroe  Doctrine  by  aiding  one  side  in  a 
local  revolution. 

Of  our  armed  intervention  in  Cuba  it  is  scarcely  neces- 
sary to  speak,  except  to  refer  in  passing  to  the  newspaper 
stor3%  credited  and  believed  in  Cuba,  that  if  American 
troops  are  again  obliged  to  intervene  in  the  political  life 
of  that  country,  they  will  not  be  withdrawn  as  has  been  the 
practice  in  the  past. 

The  menace  of  intervention,  armed  intervention,  the 
threatened  presence  of  machine  guns  and  American  mar- 
ines, have  repeatedly  been  used  by  Latin-American  poli- 
ticians in  their  endeavors  to  keep  the  peace  in  their  own 
countries.  And  we  have  done  enough  of  that  sort  of  thing 
to  make  it  evident  to  disinterested  observers  that  our  pres- 
ent conception  of  the  Monroe  Doctrine  is  to  act  as  inter- 
national policeman,  or  at  least  as  an  elder-brother-with-a- 
big-stick,  whenever  the  little  fellows  get  too  fresh. 

Is  this  Doctrine  worth  while? 

Let  us  see  what  it  involves:  first,  from  the  European, 
second,  from  the  Latin-American  point  of  view.^ 

2  Hiram  Bingham,  Atlantic  Monthly,   111:721. 


lOI 


CHAPTER  VI 

THE  DISCUSSION  — CONVICTION 

It  has  been  seen  that  one  who  wishes  to  estabhsh 
the  truth  or  the  falsity  of  a  proposition  must  answer 
certain  vital  questions  that  are  bound  to  arise  in 
connection  with  it.  Then,  as  different  persons  may 
answer  these  questions  in  different  ways,  it  be- 
comes necessary  for  him  to  convince  his  audience 
that  his  answers  are  correct.  He  must  always  be- 
ware of  assertiveness.  This  defect  occurs  whenever 
a  speaker  or  writer  makes  a  statement  but  does  not 
establish  its  truth.  As  simple  denial  is  always  suf- 
ficient answer  to  mere  assertions,  an  unsupported 
statement  is  worthless.  No  one  can  hope  to  win  in 
debate  or  change  another's  belief  unless  he  can 
prove  that  what  he  says  is  true;  he  must  substan- 
tiate with  proof  every  statement  that  he  makes,  and 
show  that  no  possibility  for  error  or  deceit  can 
exist.  In  argumentation  every  statement  not  com- 
manly  accepted  as  true  must  he  proved. 

102 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

The  following  passage  is  a  highly  assertive  bit  of 
argument ;  its  worthlessness  is  apparent : 

The  passing  of  the  tariff  bill  in  the  last  Congress  was  the 
biggest  and  the  best  piece  of  constructive  legislation  that 
the  government  has  seen  for  the  past  one  hundred  years. 
Under  its  benign  influence  American  industry  will  thrive. 
Every  mill  wheel  will  turn;  every  anvil  will  ring.  The 
farmer  can  till  his  broad  acres  strengthened  with  the  knowl- 
edge that  an  eager  market  awaits  every  bushel  of  grain 
that  he  may  raise.  Wages  will  go  up,  but  the  necessities  of 
life  will  become  cheaper.  The  scientific  classification  of 
tariff  schedules  places  the  burdens  of  taxation  where  they 
can  best  be  borne.  High  wages  and  cheap  foodstuffs ! 
Who  can  ask  for  more  than  that?  And  all  the  time  there 
will  be  ample  revenue  for  every  expense  of  the  government. 

Proof  is  ''  anything  which  serves  either  immedi- 
ately or  mediately  to  convince  the  mind  of  the  truth 
or  the  falsehood  of  a  fact  or  proposition."  ^  Belief 
in  a  specific  statement  is  induced  by  a  presentation 
of  pertinent  facts,  and  usually  by  a  process  of 
reasoning  whereby  from  the  existence  of  these 
known  facts,  the  conclusion,  hitherto  unaccepted, 
is  reached.  Those  facts  that  have  to  do  with  the 
proposition  under  discussion  are  known  as  evidence. 
The  process  of  combining  facts  and  deriving  an 
inference  from  them  is  known  as  reasoning.  Evi- 
dence may  be  made  up  of  the  testimony  of  witnesses, 
the  opinion   of   experts,   knowledge   derived   from 

1  On  Evidence,  Best,  p.  45. 

103 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

experience,  the  testimony  of  documents,  or  circum- 
stances that  are  generally  known  to  have  existed. 
Reasoning  is  the  process  by  which  men  form  opin- 
ions, render  judgments,  explain  events,  or  in  any 
way  seek  new  truths  from  established  facts. 

In  the  following  quotation  notice  how  the  simplest 
form  of  reasoning  from  a  few  facts  constitutes 
strong  proof : 

Any  one  who  studies  the  figures  of  our  recent  elections 
must  be  convinced  that  if  the  people  do  not  rule  as  fully 
and  completely  as  they  ought  to  rule,  it  is  at  least  partially 
because  they  are  too  indolent,  or  too  indifferent,  to  take  the 
necessary  trouble.  In  1908,  when  Taft  and  Bryan  were 
candidates  for  the  Presidency,  the  number  of  voters  who 
stayed  away  from  the  polls  was  more  than  seven  million,  or 
about  one-third  of  the  entire  electorate.  Even  in  the  elec- 
tion wheii  Wilson,  Roosevelt,  and  Taft  were  candidates, 
and  when  the  popular  interest  was  as  great  as  it  is  ever 
likely  to.be,  thirty  voters  out  of  every  one  hundred  stayed 
at  home  on  election  day.  In  Ohio  in  1912,  a  state  conven- 
tion was  held  for  the  purpose  of  drafting  amendments 
to  the  state  constitution.  Only  one-fourth  of  the  voters 
went  to  the  polls  and  voted  for  the  convention  delegates. 
Out  of  thirty-two  legislative  measures  submitted  to  the  peo- 
ple of  Oregon  at  the  general  election  of  1910,  not  a  single 
one  was  adopted  or  rejected  by  a  majority  of  the  enrolled 
voters.  In  the  primary  election  in  New  York  in  1912,  only 
fifteen  per  cent,  of  the  voters  cast  a  ballot.  The  govern- 
ment falls  into  the  hands  of  the  bosses  and  politicians  be- 
cause the  people  do  not  do  their  duty. 


104 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

Since  the  first  step  in  the  generation  of  proof  is 
the  discovery  of  facts,  the  arguer  should  at  the  very 
outset  become  sufficiently  familiar  with  the  various 
kinds  of  evidence  to  estimate  the  value  and  strength 
of  each  idea  that  has  a  bearing  upon  the  subject. 


I.    EVIDENCE 

There  are  two  kinds  of  evidence:  (a)  direct,  and 
(b)  indirect  or  circumstantial.  If  a  man  sees  a 
gang  of  strikers  set  fire  to  the  buildings  of  their 
former  employer,  his  evidence  is  direct.  If,  how- 
ever, he  only  sees  them  stealthily  leaving  the  build- 
ings just  before  the  fire  breaks  out,  his  evidence  is 
indirect.  In  the  latter  case  the  man's  testimony  is 
direct  evidence  that  the  men  were  in  the  vicinity  of 
the  fire  when  it  started,  but  it  is  indirect  evidence 
that  they  perpetrated  the  crime.  If  a  student  who 
has  failed  to  do  good  work  throughout  the  term, 
and  who  has  had  Httle  or  no  opportunity  for  special 
preparation,  passes  in  a  perfect  paper  at  the  close 
of  an  examination,  the  presumption  is  that  he  has 
received  aid.  The  evidence  on  which  this  supposi- 
tion rests  is  entirely  circumstantial.  But  if  some 
one  saw  the  student  obtaining  aid,  that  fact  would 
be  direct  evidence  against  him. 
105 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

Direct  evidence,  as  a  rule,  is  considered  more 
valuable  than  indirect,  but  each  kind  is  frequently 
sufficient  to  induce  belief.  The  best  possible  kind 
of  evidence,  the  kind  that  is  least  liable  to  contain 
error  or  falsehood,  is  a  combination  of  both  direct 
and  indirect.  Either  one  by  itself  may  be  untrust- 
worthy. The  unreliability  of  evidence  given  by 
eyewitnesses  is  shown  by  the  conflicting  stories  they 
frequently  tell  concerning  the  same  incident  even 
when  they  are  honestly  attempting  to  relate  the  facts 
as  they  occurred.  Also,  it  is  always  possible  that 
the  inferences  drawn  from  a  combination  of  cir- 
cumstances may  be  entirely  wrong.  When,  how- 
ever, both  kinds  of  evidence  are  available,  each 
confirming  the  other  and  leading  up  to  the  same 
conclusion,  then  the  possibility  of  error  is  reduced 
to  a  minimum. 

The  opportunity  of  the  college  student  for  ob- 
taining evidence  in  his  argumentative  work  is 
limited.  A  lawyer  before  entering  upon  an  impor- 
tant case  often  spends  weeks  and  months  in  in- 
vestigation; scientists  sometimes  devote  a  whole 
^  lifetime  in  tr^-ing  to  establish  a  single  hypothesis. 
But  the  college  student  in  preparing  an  argument 
must  obtain  his  evidence  in  a  few  days.  There  are 
several  sources  at  his  disposal.  The  first  available 
1 06 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

source  is  his  fund  of  general  knowledge  and  ex- 
perience. If  a  man  can  establish  a  statement  by 
saying  that  he  personally  knows  it  to  be  true,  he  has 
valuable  proof.  Then  the  people  w4th  whom  the 
student  comes  in  contact  constitute  another  source 
of  evidence.  Any  one  who  can  give  information  on 
a  subject  that  is  being  investigated  is  a  valuable 
witness.  Especially  in  discussions  on  questions 
which  pertain  to  college  life,  the  opinions  and  ex- 
periences of  college  men  and  of  prominent  educators 
are  unsurpassed  as  evidenece.  But  the  greatest 
source  of  evidence  for  the  student  of  argumentation 
is  the  library.  Here  he  may  consult  the  best  thought 
of  all  time  in  every  branch  of  activity.  He  may 
review  the  opinions  of  statesmen,  economists,  edu- 
cators, and  scientists,  and  introduce  as  evidence 
their  experiences  and  the  results  of  their  investiga- 
tions. Here  he  may  familiarize  himself  with  the 
current  events  of  the  world,  and  draw  his  own  con- 
clusions as  to  their  significance.  In  fact,  a  well 
equipped  library  treats  of  all  subjects,  however 
broad  or  narrow  they  may  be,  and  furnishes  evi- 
dence for  all  sorts  of  debatable  questions. 

As  not  all  evidence  is  equally  valuable,  a  large 
part  of  the  work  of  argumentation  consists  in  ap- 
plying tests  to  the  evidence  at  hand  for  the  sake  of 
107 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

determining  what  facts  are  irrefutable,  what  are 
doubtful,  and  what  are  worthless.  Moreover,  one 
engaged  in  argumentation  must  test  not  only  his 
own  evidence  but  also  that  of  the  other  side.  No 
better  method  of  refuting  an  opponent's  argument 
exists  than  to  show  that  the  facts  on  which  it  rests 
are  untrustworthy.  Tests  of  evidence  may  be  di- 
vided into  two  classes :  tests  of  the  source  from 
which  it  comes,  and  tests  of  the  quality  of  the  evi- 
dence itself. 

A.     Tests  of  the  Source  of  Evidence 

Since  in  courts  of  law,  in  college  debate,  and 
in  all  kinds  of  argumentation,  facts  are  established 
by  the  testimony  of  witnesses,  the  sources  of  evi- 
dence are  the  witnesses  who  give  it.  The  debater 
and  the  argumentative  writer  have  not  the  oppor- 
tunity, as  has  the  lawyer,  of  producing  the  witnesses 
and  permitting  them  to  tell  their  own  stones  to  the 
audience.  He  must  himself  relate  the  evidence ;  and, 
in  order  that  it  may  be  believed,  he  must  tell  whence 
it  comes.  The  sources  of  evidence  may  be  common 
rumor,  newspapers,  magazines,  official  documents, 
private  citizens,  or  public  officials.  The  extent  to 
which  these  witnesses  are  accepted  as  trustworthy 
by  the  people  before  whom  they  are  quoted  de- 
io8 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

termines  in  a  large  measure  whether  or  not  the 
evidence  will  be  believed.  Tests  for  determining 
the  trustworthiness  of  witnesses  will  next  be  given. 

The  first  test  of  the  source  of  evidence  should 
be: 

(i)     Is  the  witness  competent  to  give  a  trust- 
worthy account  of  the  matter  under  consideration  f 

To  answer  this  question,  first  determine  whether 
the  facts  to  be  established  are  such  that  any  ordinary 
person  can  speak  concerning  them  with  reasonable 
accuracy,  or  whether  they  can  be  understood  only 
by  persons  w^ho  have  received  special  training.  A 
landsman  could  well  testify  that  a  naval  battle  had 
occurred,  but  only  a  man  with  nautical  training 
could  accurately  describe  the  manoeuvers  of  the 
ships  and  tell  just  how  the  engagement  progressed. 
A  coal  heaver's  description  of  a  surgical  operation 
would  establish  nothing,  except  perhaps  the  identity 
of  the  people  and  a  few  other  general  matters ;  only 
a  person  with  a  medical  education  could  accurately 
describe  the  procedure.  The  testimxony  of  any  one 
but  a  naturalist  would  not  even  tend  to  prove  the  ex- 
istence of  a  hitherto  unknown  species  of  animal 
life.  A  witness  without  technical  knowledge  can- 
not give  reliable  evidence  on  matters  of  a  technical 
nature. 

109 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

Then,  if  it  is  found  that  the  witness  does  possess 
the  necessary  technical  training,  or  that  no  previous 
training  is  necessary,  still  further  test  his  ability  to 
give  reliable  evidence  by  asking  whether  he  has  had 
ample  opportunity  for  investigating  the  facts  to  the 
existence  of  which  he  testifies.  For  even  a  skilled 
player  sitting  in  the  first  base  bleachers  at  a  baseball 
game  to  criticize  an  umpire's  decisions  on  balls  and 
strikes  is  absurd;  the  opinion  of  a  transient  visitor 
to  Panama  on  the  methods  used  in  operating  the 
Canal  is  not  valuable;  a  traveler  who  has  spent  a 
single  month  in  Japan  cannot  draw  reliable  con- 
clusions on  the  merits  and  defects  of  its  political 
structure.  In  not  one  of  these  cases  has  the  op- 
portunity for  investigation  been  sufficient  to  render 
the  witness  able  to  give  reliable  evidence. 

A  current  magazine  in  discussing  the  weakness  of 
testimony  that  comes  from  incompetent  witnesses 
says: 

Generalizations  about  the  tastes  and  interests  of  the  age 
are  so  easy  that  all  except  the  most  wary  fall  into  them, 
and  the  world  is  full  of  off-hand  opinions  touching  the 
condition  of  society  and  the  state  of  the  world,  which  are 
far  more  conspicuous  for  courage  than  for  discretion. 
There  are  very  few  men  or  women  in  any  particular  period 
who  know  it  intimately  enough,  and  with  sufficient  insight 
and  sympathy,  to  pass  judgment  upoh  it.  One  hears  almost 
every  day  sweeping  judgments  about  Americans,  English, 
IIO 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

French,  Germans,  Chinese,  and  Japanese  which  are  entirely 
valueless,  unless  they  are  based  on  a  very  broad  and  in- 
timate knowledge  of  these  various  peoples,  a  knowledge 
which,  in  the  nature  of  things,  few  people  possess.  The 
charming  American  girl  who  declared  that,  since  gloves 
are  cheaper  in  Paris,  American  civilization  is  a  failure, 
may  stand  for  a  type  of  interesting  and  piquant  oracles,  to 
be  heard  with  attention,  but  under  no  circumstances  to  be 
followed.  Americans  are  so  familiar  with  the  European 
traveler  who  arrives  and  makes  up  his  opinion  over  night 
in  regard  to  men,  morals,  and  manners  in  the  Western 
world  and  have  so  often  been  the  victim  of  this  self-con- 
fident critic,  that  they  ought  not  to  repeat  the  same  blunder 
in  deahng  with  other  peoples.^ 

In  the  court  room,  where  witnesses  are  present 
and  can  be  carefully  examined  by  the  lawyers  on 
both  sides,  it  is  customary  to  apply  both  mental  and 
physical  tests.  The  witness  who  testifies  to  knowl- 
edge of  some  event  that  occurred  a  long  time  before 
is  given  a  memory  test;  the  senses,  also,  through 
which  occurrences  are  perceived  are  frequently  ex- 
amined. But  as  writers  and  debaters  in  general  sel- 
dom have  the  opportunity  to  apply  tests  of  this  sort 
to  their  sources  of  infomiation  and  as  these  tests 
are  seldom  important  outside  of  the  law  courts  they 
are  not  taken  up  in  detail  in  this  book. 

The  second  test  of  the  source  of  evidence  should 
be: 

2  Outlook,  86:384. 

Ill 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

(2)  Is  the  zvitness  ivilUng  to  give  an  accurate  ac- 
count of  the  matter? 

One  iniporfant  influence  that  may  cause  a  witness 
to  give  false  evidence  is  self-interest.  Not  only  in- 
dividuals, but  social  and  industrial  organizations, 
political  parties,  communities,  and  States  are  fre- 
quently swayed  by  this  emotion  to  the  extent  of  de- 
liberately perverting  the  truth.  The  evidence  found 
in  newspapers  and  other  publications  is  often  false, 
or  at  least  misleading,  because  it  has  been  tampered 
with  by  those  who  put  their  selfish  interests  before 
all  else.  The  owner  of  an  industry  protected  by  a 
high  tariff  would  scarcely  be  considered  a  reliable 
witness  in  matters  affecting  tariff  reform.  The 
opinion  of  a  railroad  magnate  on  the  subject  of  a 
compulsory  two-cent  rate  law  would  not  be  consid- 
ered as  unbiased.  No  disinterested  seeker  after 
truth  would  accept  the  political  conclusions  of  a 
newspaper  owned  by  a  politician  or  recognized  as 
the  organ  of  a  certain  party.  In  all  such  cases  self- 
interest  may  prompt  the  witness  to  make  statements 
not  in  strict  accordance  with  the  truth.  Perjury  in 
the  court  room  is  not  uncommon;  falsehood  else- 
where must  be  guarded  against.  The  arguer  should 
always  carefully  scrutinize  the  testimony  of  a  wit- 
ness who  has  any  special  interest  in  the  matter  for 
112 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

which  evidence  is  being  sought.  Though  the  self- 
interest  is  strong,  the  witness  may  be  wiUing  to  state 
the  matter  accurately ;  but,  as  long  as  human  nature 
remains  as  it  is,  this  willingness  should  not  be  taken 
for  granted. 

The  third  test  of  the  source  of  evidence  should 
be: 

( 3  )     Is  the  iiitness  p rejudicedf 

Another  emotion  that  frequently  keeps  a  witness 
from  telling  the  exact  truth  is  prejudice.  Every  one 
is  familiar  with  instances  of  how  this  passion  warps 
men's  morals  and  corrupts  their  judgment.  If  a 
man  is  prejudiced  for  or  against  a  person  or  a  sys- 
tem, he  cannot  be  accepted  as  a  trustworthy  witness 
in  matters  where  his  prejudice  comes  into  play. 
Should  an  economist  known  to  favor  socialism  write 
a  treatise  advocating  municipal  ownership  of  public 
utilities,  his  evidence  and  his  reasoning  would  not 
be  convincing;  it  would  be  taken  for  granted  that 
he  looked  at  the  subject  through  socialistic  spec- 
tacles. A  person  who  sets  out  with  the  expectation 
and  intention  of  finding  flaws  in  anything  usually 
succeeds.  Though  he  is  willing  to  tell  the  exact 
truth,  yet  because  of  his  prejudice  he  is  sure  to  see 
only  that  which  will  coincide  with  his  preconceived 
opinions.  For  this  reason,  political  speeches  and 
113 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

intensely  partisan  books  and  papers  are  invariably 
unreliable  sources  of  evidence  even  though  they  are 
not  intentionally  dishonest. 

The   fourth  test  of  the  source  of   evidence  is : 

(4)  Does  the  imtness  have  a  good  reputation  for 
honesty  and  accuracy? 

The  human  conscience  is  so  constituted  that  many 
people  deviate  from  the  truth  for  no  apparent 
reason  whatever.  Some  are  given  to  exaggeration ; 
some  habitually  pretend  to  know  that  of  which  they 
are  entirely  ignorant;  others  are  so  inaccurate  that 
everything  they  say  is  open  to  grave  suspicion.  If 
a  witness  is  known  to  have  been  repeatedly  dis- 
honest or  inaccurate  in  the  past,  little  reliance 
should  be  placed  in  his  testimony.  "  Yellow  jour- 
nalism," which  is  largely  the  reflection  of  common 
rumor,  affords  constant  examples  of  witnesses  that 
give  questionable  evidence. 

Ability  and  willingness  to  give  exact  evidence, 
an  unprejudiced  attitude,  and  a  good  reputation  for 
honesty  and  accuracy  are  the  qualities  that  should 
characterize  the  sources  of  evidence.  If  a  writer 
or  speaker  is  securing  testimony  from  friends  or 
acquaintances,  the  application  of  these  tests  is  not 
difficult.  If,  however,  the  sources  are  books  and 
periodicals,  his  work  is  harder;  but  to  be  success- 

114 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

fill,  he  must  not  shirk  it.  When  one  procures 
evidence  from  books,  he  should  investigate  the 
character  and  standing  of  the  author.  When  one 
obtains  it  from  signed  articles  in  papers  and  maga- 
zines, he  must  consider  both  the  author  and  the 
character  of  the  publication.  In  the  case  of  news- 
paper "  stories  "  and  editorials,  one  should  find  out 
on  what  general  policy  and  principles  the  paper  is 
conducted.  A  cautious  arguer  will  always  avoid, 
as  far  as  he  'can,  the  use  of  evidence  that  comes 
from  a  doubtful  source.  If  one  finds  that  an 
opponent  has  used  the  testimony  of  questionable 
witnesses,  he  can,  by  exposing  the  fact,  easily  refute 
the  argument. 

Necessity  of  Stating  Sources.  It  sometimes 
happens  that  an  arguer  fails  to  state  the  source  of 
his  evidence.  This  omission  is  usually  fatal  to  suc- 
cess. No  one  is  likely  to  put  much  confidence  in 
statements  that  are  introduced  by  such  flimsy  pre- 
ambles as,  ''  A  certain  statesman  has  declared  " ; 
"  I  have  read  somewhere  " ;  "  An  acquaintance  told 
me."  Not  only  must  evidence  come  from  sources 
that  seem  good  to  the  writer,  but  those  sources  must 
be  satisfactory  to  the  audience.  In  the  last  analysis 
the  audience  is  the  judge  of  what  is  credible  and 
what  is  not.  Moreover,  if  the  evidence  is  of  great 
115 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

importance,  or  is  liable  to  be  disputed,  the  arguer 
should  show  in  a  few  words  why  the  witness  is 
especially  reliable. 

B.     Internal  Tests  of  Evidence 

(l)  Is  the  evidence  consistent  zvith  (a)  other 
evidence  in  the  same  argument;  (h)  knozcn  facts; 
(c)  human  experience? 

The  requirement  that  every  separate  bit  of  evi- 
dence in  an  argument  shall  be  consistent  with  every 
other  bit  of  evidence  in  the  same  argument  is  too 
well  understood  to  need  explanation.  One  familiar 
with  courts  of  law  knows  that  a  witness  Vv^ho  con- 
tradicts himself  is  not  believed.  Furthermore,  if  the 
testimony  of  several  witnesses  for  the  same  side  is 
inconsistent,  the  case  for  that  side  is  materially 
weakened.  So  it  is  in  general  debate:  the  arguer 
who  wishes  to  succeed  must  not  use  evidence  that 
is  self-contradictory.  His  proof  must  "  hang  to- 
gether " ;  his  facts  must  all  go  to  establish  the  same 
conclusion. 

A  flagrant  violation  of  this  principle  once  oc- 
curred in  a  class-room  debate.  The  speaker  for 
the  negative  on  the  proposition,  ''Resolved,  That 
freshmen  should  be  ineligible  for  college  teams,'* 
said  that  such  a  rule  would  deprive  the  freshmen  of 
Ii6 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

much-needed  physical  exercise.  Later  on,  he  said 
that  just  as  many  freshmen  would  receive  injuries 
under  this  rule  as  without  it,  since  they  would  take 
part  in  equally  dangerous  contests  as  members  of 
freshmen  teams.  This  contradiction  ruined  his  ar- 
gument. 

In  the  next  place,  evidence  to  be  of  any  value 
whatever,  must  be  consistent  with  what  is  known 
about  the  case.  If  an  arguer  is  so  careless  as  to 
make  statements  contradictory  either  to  well-estab- 
lished facts  or  to  facts  easily  proved,  he  cannot  hope 
to  attain  the  slightest  measure  of  success.  Only 
one  guilty  of  gross  neglect  or  absolute  falsehood  is 
likely  to  fall  into  such  an  error.  The  following 
quotation  shows  how  effectively  such  an  argument 
is  demoHshed: 

Those  who  are  so  constantly  urging  that  the  States  of 
North  America  and  of  South  America  are  by  geographical 
proximity  friends  and  allies,  commercially  and  politically, 
apparently  forget  that  the  largest  cities  of  South  America 
are  geographically  nearer  to  Spain  and  Portugal  than  to 
New  York  and  New  England.  They  fail  to  remember  that 
the  rich  East  Coast  of  South  America  is  no  farther  from 
Europe  than  it  is  from  Florida.  As  for  the  West  Coast, 
it  actually  takes  longer  to  travel  from  Valpariso,  the  chief 
South  American  west  coast  port,  to  San  Francisco,  the 
chief  North  American  west  coast  port,  than  it  does  to  go 
from  Valpariso  to  London. 


117 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

Abraham  Lincoln  was  an  expert  at  detecting  in- 
consistency wherever  it  existed.  He  won  many  of 
his  lawsuits  by  the  straightforward  method  of  show- 
ing that  the  one  or  two  vital  statements  on  which 
the  whole  case  of  the  opposition  rested  were  false, 
inasmuch  as  they  were  inconsistent  with  well-estab- 
lished and  incontrovertible  facts.  An  instance  of 
this  sort  is  here  described : 

The  most  damaging  evidence  was  that  of  one  Allen, 
who  swore  that  he  had  seen  Armstrong  strike  Metzker 
about  ten  or  eleven  o'clock  in  the  evening.  When  asked 
how  he  could  see,  he  answered  that  the  moon  shone 
brightly.  Under  Lincoln's  questioning  he  repeated  the  state- 
ment until  it  was  impossible  that  the  jury  should  forget  it. 
With  Allen's  testimony  unimpeached,  conviction  seemed 
certain. 

Lincoln's  address  to  the  jury  was  full  of  pathos.  It  was 
not  as  a  hired  attorney  that  he  was  there,  he  said,  but  to 
discharge  a  debt  of  friendship.  .  .  .  But  Lincoln  was  not 
relying  on  sympathy  alone  to  win  his  case.  In  closing  he 
reviewed  the  evidence,  showing  that  all  depended  on  Allen's 
testimony,  and  this  he  said  he  could  prove  to  be  false. 
Allen  never  saw  Armstrong  strike  ]Metzker  by  the  light  of 
the  moon,  for  at  the  hour  when  he  said  he  saw  the  fight, 
between  ten  and  eleven  o'clock,  the  moon  was  not  in  the 
heavens.  Then  procuring  an  almanac,  he  passed  it  to  the 
judge  and  jury.  The  moon,  which  was  on  that  night  only 
in  its  first  quarter,  had  set  before  midnight.^ 

3  The  Life  of  Abraham  Lincoln,  Vol.  I,  p.  2^2.  Ida  M.  Tarbell. 
The  Doubleday  &  McClure  Co. 

Il8 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

An  arguer  should  also  be  extremely  careful  to 
use  evidence  that  on  its  face  appears  reasonable. 
Only  an  extremely  credulous  audience  will  accept 
ideas  that  run  counter  to  human  belief  and  experi- 
ence. To  attribute  the  occurrence  of  an  event  to 
supernatural  causes  would  bring  a  smile  of  derision 
to  any  but  a  most  ignorant  and  superstitious  person. 
To  attribute  to  men  qualities  and  characteristics 
that  human  experience  has  shown  they  do  not 
possess  will  bring  equal  discredit.  No  one  is  likely 
to  accept  evidence  that  contradicts  his  habits  of 
thinking,  that  is  contrary  to  what  his  life  and  ex- 
perience have  taught  him  is  true.  For  this  reason 
savage  people  are  slow  to  believe  the  teachings  of 
the  Christian  religion.  For  this  reason  it  is  difficult 
to  make  an  audience  believe  that  any  one  will  de- 
liberately and  consistently  work  against  his  own 
interests,  or  follow  any  other  unusual  hne  of  action. 
Evidence  contrary  to  human  experience  may  be 
true,  but  it  needs  explanation  and  proof.  Unless 
such  proof  is  forthcoming,  the  argument  is  open  to 
rebuttal.     ISTotice  the  following  example: 

The  advocates  of  the  commission  form  of  municipal  gov- 
ernment say  that  this  system  means  government  by  the 
people  and  freedom  from  boss  rule.    In  reality,  however,  a 

119 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

commission  means  government  by  a  small  oligarchy,  even 
though  chosen  by  the  people.  It  is  a  form  of  benevolent 
paternalism  that  confesses  incompetency  in  representative 
government.  The  history  of  the  development  of  all  or- 
ganizations, whether  governments,  church  hierarchies, 
secret  organizations,  or  what  not,  shows  that  when  a  few 
men  are  vested  with  extraordinary  power  this  power  be- 
comes centralized  and  extremely  difficult  to  dislodge. 
There  is  every  reason  for  believing  that  government  by 
commission  will  operate  very  quickly  toward  this  end.  If 
it  does  not,  it  will  be  an  exception  to  a  universal  rule,  con- 
trary to  universal  experience. 

(2)  Is  the  evidence  first-hand  or  hearsay  evi- 
dence F 

It  is  universally  recognized  that  hearsay  evidence 
is  unreliable.  A  narrative  is  sure  to  become  so 
garbled  by  passing  from  mouth  to  mouth  that  un- 
less a  witness  can  testify  to  a  fact  from  his  own 
personal  knowledge  the  evidence  he  gives  is  worthy 
of  little  credence.  There  is  sufficient  chance  for 
error  when  the  person  who  witnessed  the  event 
relates  the  account  himself;  if  the  story  is  told  by 
a  second,  and  perhaps  by  a  third  person,  it  is  likely 
to  reflect  but  little  of  what  really  happened.  Every 
one  is  familiar  with  the  exaggerations  of  common 
rumor;  it  distorts  facts  so  that  they  are  unrecogniz- 
able. The  works  of  Herodotus  are  untrustworthy 
because  he  frequently  believed  hearsay  evidence. 
Since  second-hand  evidence  both  fails  to  establish 
120 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

anything  worth  while,  if  allowed  to  stand,  and  is 
easily  overthrown  even  by  a  very  little  first-hand 
evidence,  an  arguer  will  do  well  to  follow  the  cus- 
tom of  the  law  courts,  and,  as  a  rule,  exclude  it 
altogether. 

(3)  Can  the  evidence  he  considered  as  especially 
valuable  f 

(a)  Hurtful  admissions  constitute  an  especially 
valuable  kind  of  evidence.  Since  men  are  not  wont 
to  give  evidence  detrimental  to  their  personal  in- 
terest unless  im.pelled  to  do  so  by  conscientious 
scruples,  any  testimony  damaging  to  the  one  who 
gives  it  is  in  all  probability  not  only  truthful,  but 
also  the  result  of  careful  investigation.  When  a 
practising  physician  admits  that  half  the  ailments 
of  mankind  are  imaginary  or  so  trivial  as  to  need 
no  medical  attention,  he  is  making  a  statement  that 
is  likely  to  injure  his  business;  for  this  reason  he 
is  probably  stating  the  result  of  his  experience 
truthfully.  If  a  railroad  president  says  that  in  his 
opinion  more  stringent  government  supervision  of 
railroads  will  benefit  the  public  in  the  matter  of 
rates  and  service,  it  may  be  taken  for  granted  that 
he  has  given  his  honest  belief,  and  that  his  natural 
reluctance  to  surrender  any  authority  of  his  ovv^n  has 
kept  him  from  speaking  carelessly.  If  a  member  of 
121 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

the  United  States  Senate  admits  that  that  body  is 
corrupt,  and  selfish,  and  untrustworthy,  he  is  lower- 
ing his  own  rank;  therefore  it  is  reasonable  to  be- 
lieve that  he  is  speaking  the  truth  according  to  his 
honest  belief. 

The  following  is  an  example  of  this  kind  of 
evidence : 

Could  the  flabbiest  of  mollycoddles  have  spoken  out  so 
sharply  against  the  excess  of  athleticism  in  the  colleges  as 
Mr.  Courtney,  of  Cornell,  did  the  other  day?  In  speeches 
before  Cornell  alumni  associations  in  the  West,  the  greatest 
of  American  rowing  experts,  the  field-marshal  of  countless 
victories,  has  explicitly  declared  that  the  legitimate  work 
of  the  university  is  suffering  from  too  much  athletics.  Too 
many  men  on  probation  are  on  the  football  team,  the  track 
team,  and  even  the  crew.  The  strain  of  too  many  games 
and  races  is  bad  for  the  men.* 

It  is  hardly  necessary  to  add  that  one  who  places 
especial  reliance  on  this  kind  of  evidence  must  be 
sure  that  the  admission  is  really  and  not  merely 
apparently  contrary  to  the  interest  of  the  one  who 
gives  it. 

(b)  Another  particularly  valuable  kind  of  evi- 
dence is  negative  evidence  or  the  evidence  of  si- 
lence. Whenever  a  witness  fails  to  mention  an 
event  which,  if  it  had  occurred,  would  have  been 
of  such  interest  to  him  that  he  might  reasonably 

i  Nation,  98:148. 

122 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

be  expected  to  have  mentioned  it,  his  silence  upon 
the  matter  becomes  negative  evidence  that  the 
event  did  not  occur.  For  many  years  no  one  sug- 
gested that  Bacon  wrote  the  Shakespearean  plays; 
this  absence  of  testimony  to  the  belief  that  Bacon 
vi^rote  them  is  strong  evidence  that  such  belief  did 
not  exist  until  recently,  a  fact  that  tends  to  dis- 
credit the  Baconian  theory  of  authorship.  The 
fact  that  in  the  writings  of  Dickens  and  Thackeray 
no  mention  is  made  of  the  bicycle  is  negative  evi- 
dence that  the  bicycle  had  not  then  come  into  use. 
That  Moses  nov/here  in  his  writings  speaks  of  life 
after  death  is  negative  evidence  that  the  Hebrews 
of  his  time  did  not  believe  in  the  immortality  of 
the  soul.  If  admittedly  capable  and  impartial  of- 
ficials do  not  inflict  penalties  for  foul  playing  dur- 
ing a  football  game,  there  is  strong  presumption 
that  little  or  no  foul  playing  occurred. 

The  following  paragraph  shows  how  this  kind  of 
evidence  may  be  handled  very  effectively: 

The  suggestion  that  the  recall  of  judges  might  be  used 
successfully  by  the  corporations  and  special  interests  is  a 
childish  suggestion  in  view  of  the  fact  that  the  special  in- 
terests and  their  spokesmen  —  the  lawyers  and  lobbyists  of 
the  trusts,  railroads,  and  public  service  corporations  —  are 
not  supporting  the  measure.  If  the  recall  would  help 
Standard  Oil,  United  States  Steel,  and  Union  Pacific  work 
their  will  on  the  judiciary,  you  would  find  their  lawyers, 
123 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

editors,  and  preachers  favoring  the  law.  No  one  who  has 
studied  the  history  of  corporations  has  ever  said  he  found 
them  slow  to  support  political  measures  that  would  be  of 
practical  use  to  them. 

Argument  From  Authority 

There  is  a  particular  kind  of  evidence  frequently 
available  for  debaters  and  argumentative  writers 
known  as  argument  from  authority.  This  evidence 
consists  of  the  opinions  and  decisions  of  men  who 
are  recognized,  to  some  extent  at  least,  as  authori- 
ties on  the  subjects  of  which  they  speak.  An  emi- 
nent scientist  might  explain  with  unquestioned 
certainty  the  operation  of  certain  natural  phenom- 
ena. A  business  man  of  wide  experience  and  with 
well  recognized  insight  into  national  conditions 
might  speak  authoritatively  on  the  causes  of  busi- 
ness depressions.  In  religious  matters  the  Bible  is 
the  highest  authority  for  orthodox  Christians;  the 
Koran,  for  Mohammedans.  In  legal  affairs  the 
highest  authorities  are  court  decisions,  opinions  of 
eminent  jurists,  and  the  Constitution.  If  a  certain 
college  president  is  considered  an  authority  in  the 
matter  of  college  discipline,  then  a  quotation  from 
him  on  the  evils  of  hazing  becomes  valuable  evi- 
dence for  the  affirmative  of  the  proposition,  *'  Haz- 
ing should  be  abolished  in  all  colleges."  If  the  ar- 
124 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

guer  wishes  to  strengthen  his  evidence,  he  may  do 
so  by  giving  the  president's  reasons  for  condemning 
hazing;  but  he  then  departs  from  pure  argument 
from  authority.  Pure  argument  from  authority 
does  not  consist  of  a  statement  of  the  reasons  in- 
volved; it  asserts  that  something  is  true  because 
some  one  who  is  acknowledged  to  be  an  authority 
on  that  subject  says  it  is  true. 

Argument  from  authority  differs  from  other  evi- 
dence in  that  it  involves  not  merely  investigation 
but  also  the  exercise  of  a  high  degree  of  judgment. 
The  statement  that  in  a  certain  year  thirty-five 
cities  in  the  United  States  had  some  form  of  com- 
mission government  is  not  argument  from  author- 
ity; the  discovery  of  this  truth  involved  merely  in- 
vestigation. On  the  other  hand,  if  some  reputable 
statesman  or  business  man  should  say  that  those 
cities  which  have  commission  government  are  more 
efficiently  managed  than  those  which  have  the  mayor 
and  council  system,  this  evidence  would  be  argu- 
ment from  authority;  only  through  both  investiga- 
tion and  judgment  could  such  a  statement  be 
evolved. 

This  kind  of  evidence  is  very  strong  when  those 
addressed  have  confidence  in  the  integrity,  ability, 
and  judgment  of  the  person  quoted.  If,  however, 
125 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

they  do  not  know  him,  or  if  they  do  not  consider 
him  reliable,  the  evidence  is  of  little  value.  There- 
fore, the  test  that  an  arguer  should  apply  before 
using  this  kind  of  evidence  is  as  follows: 

Is  the  witness  an  acknozuledged  authority  on  the 
subject  about  zvhich  he  speaks? 

Sometimes  a  short  statement  showing  why  the 
witness  quoted  is  able  to  speak  wisely  and  con- 
clusively will  render  the  evidence  more  valuable 
in  the  eyes  of  the  audience.  In  the  following  quo- 
tation the  author  makes  a  statement  and  proves  it 
by  "  authority  '' : 

The  little  red  schoolhouse  —  the  public  school  of  the 
country  —  has  an  affectionate  place  in  the  minds  of  the 
American  people,  but  otherv/ise  it  is  sadly  neglected.  Mr. 
A.  C.  Monahan  of  the  United  States  Bureau  of  Education 
says :  "  It  is  generally  true  for  the  United  States  as  a 
whole,  that  rural  schools  lack  intelligent  and  economical 
management,  adequate  supervision,  and  efficient  teaching. 
The  majority  of  them  are  housed  in  uncomfortable  build- 
ings, unsuitable  from  almost  every  standpoint,  without 
proper  furniture  or  facilities  for  heating,  ventilating,  and 
lighting;  without  adequate  provisions  for  guarding  the 
health  and  morals  of  the  children,  and  with  comparatively 
little  equipment  for  teaching."  ^ 

5  World's  Work,  26:228. 


126 


The  Discussion — Conviction 


II.    REASONING 

As  has  been  said,  proof  consists  of  evidence 
and  reasoninof.  Evidence  has  been  considered  first 
because  this  order  corresponds  to  the  way  in  which 
proof  is  usually  generated ;  obviously,  the  discovery 
of  facts  precedes  the  process  of  reasoning  which 
shows  their  significance.  In  some  instances,  how- 
ever, this  order  is  reversed:  a  man  may  form  a 
theoiy  and  then  hunt  for  the  facts  on  which  to  base 
it;  but  in  general,  facts  precede  inferences. 

Since  all  people  when  they  reason  do  not  reach 
the  same  conclusion,  it  is  very  essential  for  a  stu- 
dent to  investigate  the  various  processes  of  reason- 
ing. Given  exactly  the  same  evidence,  some  men 
will  draw  one  conclusion,  some  another.  A  cur- 
rent periodical  recognizes  this  fact  when  it  says: 

How  widely  divergent  may  be  conclusions  drawn  from 
the  same  source  can  be  judged  by  contrasting  these  two 
statements :  Messrs.  Clark  and  Edgar  declare  that  "  where 
municipal  ownership  has  been  removed  from  the  realm  of 
philosophic  discussion  and  put  to  the  test  of  actual  expe- 
rience it  has  failed  ingloriously "  ;  Professor  Parsons  and 
Mr.  Bemis  on  the  contrary  assert,  to  use  Professor  Par- 
sons' words,  "  it  is  not  public  ownership,  but  private  owner- 
ship, that  is  responsible  for  our  periodic  crisis  and  the  ruin 
of  our  industries,'*  and  "  it  is  not  impossible  that  the  elimin- 
ation of  the  public  ser\nce  corporations  through  public  own- 

127 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

ership  is  one  of  the  things  that  would  do  much  to  help 
along  the  process  of  making  our  cities  iit."  ^ 

Because  of  the  divergencies  in  the  results  pro- 
duced by  reasoning,  a  student  should  study  with 
considerable  care  the  various  processes  of  arriving 
at  a  conclusion,  so  that  he  may  be  able  to  tell  what 
methods  are  strong,  what  are  weak,  and  what  are 
fallacious. 

According  to  a  common  classification,  there  are 
two  methods  of  reasoning:  the  inductive  process, 
and  the  deductive  process. 

I.  Inductive  Reasoning.  When  one  carefully 
investigates  his  reasons  for  believing  as  he  does,  he 
often  finds  that  he  accepts  a  certain  statement  as 
true  because  he  is  familiar  with  many  specific  in- 
stances that  tend  to  estabhsh  its  truth.  The  belief 
that  prussic  acid  is  poisonous  is  based  upon  the 
large  number  of  instances  in  which  its  deadly  effect 
has  been  apparent.  The  fact  that  railroad  men  are 
exposed  to  injury  is  unquestioned  because  every  one 
is  familiar  with  the  many  accidents  that  occur  each 
year.  The  statement  that  water  freezes  at  thirty- 
two  degrees  Fahrenheit  has  been  proved  true  by 
innumerable  tests.  This  process  of  reasoning  by 
which,  from  many  specific  instances,  the  truth  of 

6  Outlook,  86:622. 

128 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

a  general  statement  is  established,  is  called  induc- 
tion. 

Examples  of  inductive  reasoning  are  found  in 
the  following  quotations: 

Our  action  in  foregoing  our  advantage  in  China  at  the 
time  of  the  Boxer  rebellion,  our  course  in  giving  Spain  mil- 
lions for  the  Philippines,  which  we  fairly  won  by  force  of 
arms,  and  later  our  action  in  Cuba  have  given  validity  to 
our  profession  of  a  desire  to  deal  fairly  and  candidly  with 
every  nation,  and  not  to  permit  might  to  become  right  in 
formulating  our  foreign  policy^ 

The  guaranty  of  bank  deposits  does  not  bring  much 
money  out  of  hoarding.  This  has  been  demonstrated  clearly 
in  Kansas,  Texas,  and  Nebraska.  In  each  of  these  States 
the  increase  of  bank  deposits  since  their  guaranty  laws  went 
into  effect  has  been  very  little  more  than  the  normal  in- 
crease in  States  near  by.s 

In  using  inductive  reasoning,  one  must  always 
be  on  his  guard  against  drawing  conclusions  too 
hastily.  It  is  never  correct  to  conclude  from  a  con- 
sideration of  only  a  few  instances  that  a  general 
truth  has  been  discovered.  Further  examination 
may  show  that  the  opinion  first  formed  will  not 
hold.  Some  people  call  all  men  dishonest  because 
several  acquaintances  have  not  kept  faith  with 
them.  Others  are  ready  to  believe  that  because 
they  have  made  money  in  the  stock  market  all  can 

7  Philadelphia  Ledger, 
s  Independent. 

129 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

do  likewise.  Most  superstitions  arise  through  gen- 
eralization from  too  few  instances :  those  who  have 
several  times  met  misfortune  on  the  thirteenth  day 
of  the  month  are  apt  to  say  that  the  thirteenth  is 
always  an  unlucky  day.  Such  reasoning  as  this 
shows  the  weakness  of  inductive  argument:  a  con- 
clusion is  worthless  if  it  is  drawn  from  too  few 
examples. 

Professor  Fred  Lewis  Pattee,  in  writing  on  Er- 
rors in  Reasoning,  says : 

Qiildren  and  even  adults  often  generalize  from  a  single 
experience.  A  little  boy  cautioned  me  at  one  time  to  keep 
away  from  a  certain  horse,  for  "  white  horses  always  kick." 
An  old  Pennsylvania  farmer  laid  down  the  law  that  shingles 
laid  during  the  increase  of  the  moon  always  curl  up.  He! 
had  tried  it  once  and  found  out.  A  friend  will  advise  you 
to  take  Blank's  Bitters:  "I  took  a  bottle  one  spring  and 
felt  much  better ;  they  always  cure."  Physicians  base  their 
knowledge  of  medicines  upon  the  observations  of  thousands 
of  trained  observers  through  many  years,  and  not  upon  a 
single  experience.  Most  people  are  prone  to  judge  their 
neighbors  from  too  slight  acquaintance.  If  a  man  is  late 
at  an  appointment  twice  in  succession,  some  one  is  sure  to 
say:  "Oh,  he's  always  late."  This  is  poor  thinking  be- 
cause it  is  bad  judgment.  Judgments  should  be  made  with 
care  and  from  fullness  of  experience.^ 

The  value  of  inductive  reasoning  depends  upon 
the  number  of  instances  observed.     Very  seldom  is 

9  The  Adult  Bible  Class  and  Teacher  Training  Monthly,  May,  1908, 
P-  295- 

130 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

it  possible  to  investigate  every  case  of  the  class 
under  discussion.  Of  course  this  can  sometimes  be 
done.  For  instance,  one  may  be  able  to  state  that 
all  his  brothers  are  college  graduates,  since  he  can 
speak  authoritatively  concerning  each  one  of  them. 
But  usually  an  examination  of  every  instance  is 
out  of  the  question,  and  whenever  induction  is  based 
on  less  than  all  existing  cases,  it  establishes  only 
probable  truth. 

From  the  foregoing  it  is  seen  that  the  tests  for  in- 
duction are  two: 

(i)  Have  enough  instances  of  the  class  under 
consideration  been  investigated  to  establish  the 
probable  existence  of  a  general  law? 

(2)  Have  enough  instances  been  investigated  to 
establish  absolutely  the  existence  of  a  general  law? 

2.  Deductive  reasoning.  Deductive  reasoning 
is  the  method  of  demonstrating  the  truth  of  a  par- 
ticular statement  by  showing  that  some  general 
principle,  which  has  previously  been  established  or 
which  is  admitted  to  be  true,  applies  to  it.  A 
stranger  on  coming  to  the  United  States  might  ask 
whether  our  postal  system  is  a  success.  The  an- 
swer would  perhaps  be,  "  Yes,  certainly  it  is,  for 
it  is  maintained  by  the  government,  and  all  our 
government  enterprises  are  successful."  When  the 
131 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

metal  thurium  was  discovered,  a  query  doubtless 
arose  as  to  whether  it  was  fusible.  It  was  then 
reasoned  that  since  all  metals  hitherto  known  were 
fusible,  and  since  thurium  was  a  metal,  undoubt- 
edly it  was  fusible.  Stated  in  clearer  form,  the 
reasoning  in  each  case  would  be: 

A.  All  our  government  enterprises  are  success- 
ful. 

B.  The  United  States  postal  system  is  a  govern- 
ment enterprise. 

C.  Therefore  the  United  States  postal  system  is 
successful. 

A.  All  metals  are  fusible. 

B.  Thurium  is  a  metal. 

C.  Therefore  thurium  is  fusible. 

Such  a  series  of  statements  is  called  a  syllogism. 
A  syllogism  always  consists  of  a  major  premise 
(A),  a  minor  premise  (B),  and  a  conclusion  (C). 
The  major  premise  always  states  a  general  law; 
the  minor  premise  shows  that  the  general  law  ap- 
plies to  the  particular  case  under  consideration ;  and 
the  conclusion  is,  in  the  light  of  the  two  premises, 
an  established  truth. 

The  strength  of  deductive  argument  depends  on 
two  things :  the  truth  of  the  premises  and  the  f ram- 
132 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

ing  of  the  syllogism.  The  syllogism  must  always  be 
so  stated  that  a  conclusion  is  derived  from  the  ap- 
plication of  a  general  law  to  some  specific  instance 
to  which  the  law  obviously  applies.  In  the  next 
place,  the  premises  must  be  true.  If  they  are  only 
probably  correct,  the  conclusion  is  a  mere  presump- 
tion; if  either  one  is  false,  the  conclusion  is  prob- 
ably false.  But  if  the  syllogism  is  correctly  framed, 
and  if  both  premises  are  true,  the  conclusion  is 
irrefutable.  As  premises  are  facts  that  have  first 
been  established  by  induction,  the  relation  between 
inductive  and  deductive  reasoning  is  very  close. 
In  fact,  deduction  depends  on  induction  for  its  very 
existence.  To  overthrow  a  deductive  argument  all 
that  is  necessary  is  to  show  the  error  in  the  induc- 
tive process  that  built  up  either  one  or  both  of  the 
premises. 

The  tests  for  deduction  are: 

(i)  Are  both  premises  true? 

(2)  Is  the  fact  stated  in  the  minor  premise  an 
instance  of  the  general  law  expressed  in  the  major 
premise? 

In  practical  argumentation  it  is  not  always  neces- 
sary or  desirable  to  express  a  deductive  argument  in 
full  syllogistic  form.  One  premise  is  frequently 
omitted;  the  syllogism  thus  shortened  is  called  an 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

enthymeme.  The  reasoning  then  takes  some  such 
form  as  "  This  man  will  fail  in  business  because 
he  is  incompetent."  The  major  premise  "  All  in- 
competent men  fail  in  business,"  is  understood,  but 
is  not  expressed.  The  enthymeme  constitutes  as 
strong  and  forceful  an  argument  as  the  syllogism, 
provided  the  suppressed  premise  is  a  well-estab- 
lished fact;  but  whenever  this  premise  is  not  ac- 
cepted as  true,  it  must  be  stated  and  proved.  The 
argument  will  then  consist  of  the  full  syllogistic 
process. 

The  following  outline  illustrates  the  chief  differ- 
ence between  induction  and  deduction : 

The  commission  form  of  municipal  government  is  a  suc- 
cess, because 

(induction) 

1.  Commission  government  has  succeeded  m  Gaiveston. 

2.  Commission  government  has  succeeded  in  Des  ]\Ioines. 

3.  Commission    government    has    succeeded    in     Cedar 
Rapids. 

(deduction) 

1.  This  system  puts  the  administrative  work  of  the  city 
in  the  hands  of  a  few  m.en, 

2.  This  system  puts  each  man  in  charge  of  certain  de- 
partments. 

3.  Under  this  system  the  people  know  exactly  where  to 
place  all  praise  and  blame. 

The  deductive  reasoning  expressed  in  full  would 

be  thus : 

134 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

(i)  A.  All  forms  of  municipal  government  that  invest 
the  administrative  work  of  the  city  in  the 
hands  of  a  few  men  are  a  success. 

B.  Commission  government  invests  the  administra- 

tive work  of  the  city  in  the  hands  of  a  few 
men. 

C.  Therefore  commission  government  is  a  success. 

The  reasoning  given  in  (2)  and  (3)  may  be  ev- 
pressed  in  similar  syllogisms. 

To  test  the  inductive  part  of  this  argument,  one 
should  determine  how  well  the  three  examples  show 
the  existence  of  a  general  law.  To  test  the  de- 
ductive part,  he  should  ask  whether  the  premises, 
both  those  stated  and  those  suppressed,  are  admitted 
facts,  or  whether  they  need  to  be  proved. 

If  all  reasoning  were  purely  inductive  or  purely 
deductive,  and  if  it  always  appeared  in  as  simple  a 
form  as  in  the  preceding  illustration,  one  would 
have  little  difficulty  in  classifying  and  testing  it. 
But  frequently  the  two  kinds  appear  in  such  ob- 
scure form  and  in  such  varied  combinations  that 
only  an  expert  logician  can  separate  and  classify 
them.  Because  of  this  difficulty,  it  is  worth  while 
to  know  a  second  method  of  classification,  one 
which  is  often  of  greater  practical  service  than  the 
method  already  discussed  in  assisting  the  arguer  to 
determine  what  methods  of  reasoning  are  strong 

135 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

and  what  are  weak.  A  knowledge  of  this  classifi- 
cation is  also  very  helpful  to  one  who  is  searching 
for  ways  in  which  to  generate  proof.  This  method 
considers  proof  from  the  standpoint  of  its  use  in 
practical  argument;  it  teaches  not  so  much  the  dif- 
ferent ways  in  which  the  mind  may  work,  as  the 
ways  in  which  it  must  work  to  arrive  at  a  sound 
conclusion. 


I.     ARGUMENT  FROM  ANTECEDENT 
PROBABILITY 

The  process  of  reasoning  from  cause  to  effect  is 
known  as  the  argument  from  antecedent  probabil- 
ity. Whenever  a  thinking  man  is  asked  to  believe 
a  statement,  he  is  much  readier  to  accept  it  as  true 
if  some  reasonable  cause  is  assigned  for  the  ex- 
istence of  the  fact  that  is  being  established.  The 
argument  from  antecedent  probability  supplies  this 
cause.  The  reasoning  may  be  from  the  past  toward 
the  present,  or  from  the  present  toward  the  future. 
If  an  inspector  condemns  a  bridge  as  unsafe,  the 
question  arises,  "  What  has  made  it  so?  "  It  some 
one  prophesies  a  rise  in  the  price  of  railroad  bonds, 
he  is  not  likely  to  be  believed  unless  he  can  show 
an  adequate  cause  for  the  increase.     In  itself,  the 

136 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

establishment  of  a  cause  proves  nothing.  A 
bridge  may  have  been  subjected  to  great  strain  and 
still  be  unimpaired.  Though  at  present  there  may 
be  ample  cause  for  a  future  rise  in  the  securities 
market,  some  other  condition  may  intervene  and 
prevent  its  operation.  The  assignment  of  a  cause 
can  at  best  establish  merely  a  probability,  and  yet 
the  laws  of  cause  and  effect  are  so  fundamental 
that  man  is  usually  loath  to  believe  that  a  condition 
exists  or  will  exist,  until  he  knows  what  has 
brought  it  about  or  what  will  bring  it  about.  A 
course  of  reasoning  which  argues  that  a  proposi- 
tion is  true  because  the  fact  affirmed  is  the  logical 
result  of  some  adequate  cause  is  called  argument 
from  antecedent  probability. 

Simple  examples  of  this  kind  of  reasoning  are 
found  in  the  following  sentences :  "  This  man  will 
succeed  in  business  because  he  is  industrious " ; 
"  If  the  import  duty  on  beef,  sugar,  and  fruit  is 
decreased,  the  cost  of  living  will  be  lowered.''  The 
following  are  more  extended  illustrations: 

Government  ownership  of  railroads  in  the  United  States 
is  now  generally  feared  by  its  citizens.  The  effects  are 
dreaded.  It  would  mean  an  enormous  increase  of  power 
and  patronage  to  the  government.  It  would  mean  that  the 
government  would  be  sv/indled  in  acquiring  the  railroads. 
It  would  mean  bad  service,  stagnation  of  enterprise,  and 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

financial  loss.  It  would  mean  inefficient  and  at  times  cor- 
rupt administration  of  the  railroads.  These  enterprises  re- 
quire the  highest  class  of  administrative  ability  and  economy 
in  their  operation.  Politicians  do  not  and  cannot  furnish 
that  ability.  Worst  of  all  the  change  would  mean  a  national 
debt  of  some  fourteen  billions  of  dollars.^^ 

Bertrand  Russell  maintains,  through  this  same 
kind  of  reasoning,  that  since  certain  fundamental 
causes  of  war  are  now  in  operation,  there  is  little 
prospect  of  permanent  world  peace : 

Beginning  in  childhood,  with  the  school  text-books  of 
history,  and  continuing  in  the  press  and  in  common  talk, 
men  are  taught  that  the  essence  of  "glory"  is  successful 
robbing  and  slaughter.  The  most  "  glorious  "  nation  is  the 
one  which  kills  the  greatest  number  of  foreigners  and 
seizes  the  greatest  extent  of  foreign  territory.  The  most 
"  patriotic  "  citizen  is  the  one  who  most  strongly  opposes 
any  attempt  at  justice  or  mercy  in  his  country's  dealings 
with  other  countries,  and  who  is  least  able  to  conceive  of 
mankind  as  all  one  family,  struggHng  painfully  from  a  con- 
dition of  universal  strife  toward  a  society  where  love  of 
one's  neighbor  is  no  longer  thought  a  crime.  ...  So  long 
as  hate  and  fear  and  pride  are  praised  and  encouraged,  war 
can  never  become  an  impossibilit3^ll 

Since  argument  from  antecedent  probability  can 
at  most  set  up  only  a  strong  presumption,  and  since 
it  is  often  not  of  sufficient  weight  to  accomplish 
even  this,  an  arguer,  to  be  successful,  must  know 

10  McClure's  Magazine,  38:352. 

11  Atlantic  Monthly,  115:376. 

138 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

the  tests  that  determine  how  strong  and  how  weak 
reasoning  of  this  sort  is.  He  may  apply  these 
tests  both  to  his  own  reasoning  and  to  the  reason- 
ing of  others.     The  first  test  is : 

(i)  Is  the  cause  of  sufficient  strength  to  pro- 
duce the  alleged  effect? 

The  significance  of  this  question  is  at  once  ap- 
parent. In  the  case  of  a  criminal  prosecution,  it 
asks  whether  the  accused  had  sufficient  motive  for 
performing  the  deed.  In  connection  with  political 
and  economic  propositions  that  advocate  a  change 
in  existing  conditions,  this  test  asks  whether  the 
new  method  proposed  is  sufficiently  virile  and  far- 
reaching  actually  to  produce  the  excellent  results 
anticipated.  A  few  years  ago  the  advocates  of  free 
silver  were  maintaining  that  *'  sixteen  to  one " 
would  be  a  sure  cure  for  all  poverty  and  financial 
distress.  A  careful  application  of  this  test  would 
have  materially  weakened  such  an  argument.  Be- 
lievers in  reformatory  rather  than  punitive  methods 
of  imprisonment  say  it  is  antecedently  probable  that 
kind  treatment,  healthful  surroundings,  and  instruc- 
tion in  various  directions  will  reclaim  most  crim- 
inals to  an  honest  life.  Before  accepting  or  re- 
jecting this  argument,  one  should  decide  in  his  own 
139 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

mind  whether  or  not  such  treatment  is  adequate 
to  make  a  released  convict  give  up  his  former 
criminal  practices. 

If  the  argument  stands  the  first  test,  the  next 
question  to  ask  is: 

(2)  May  something  intervene  and  prevent  the 
action  of  the  cause? 

During  the  spring  of  1908  it  was  generally 
known  that  the  Erie  Railroad  had  no  money  with 
which  to  pay  the  interest  that  w^as  about  due  on 
its  outstanding  bonds.  Wall  Street  prophesied 
that  the  road  would  go  into  a  receiver's  hands. 
This  result  was  extremely  probable.  Mr.  Harri- 
man,  however,  president  of  the  Union  Pacific, 
stepped  in  and  by  arranging  for  the  payment  of  the 
interest  saved  the  road  from  bankruptcy.  This 
was  an  example  of  how  an  intervention  prevented 
the  action  of  a  cause.  When  Congress  passed  the 
Fifteenth  Amendment  to  the  Constitution,  many 
people  said  that  this  legislation  would  inevitably 
cause  the  social,  political,  and  financial  ruin  of  the 
whole  South.  Since  they  did  not  take  into  consid- 
eration an  intervening  action,  namely,  drastic  meas- 
ures for  negro  disfranchisement  by  the  white  in- 
habitants of  the  South,  their  reasoning  from  ante- 
cedent probability  was  entirely  erroneous. 
140 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

2.    ARGUMENT  FROM  SIGN 

Argument  from  effect  to  cause.  The  process  of 
reasoning  from  effect  to  cause  is  called  argument 
from  sign.  Since  every  circumstance  must  be  the 
result  of  some  preceding  circumstance,  the  arguer 
cries  to  find  the  cause  of  some  fact  that  is  known  to 
exist,  and  thereby  to  establish  the  existence  of  a 
hitherto  unknown  fact.  For  instance,  when  one 
sees  a  pond  frozen  over,  he  is  likely  to  reason  back 
to  the  cause  of  this  condition  and  decide  that  there 
has  been  a  fall  in  temperature,  a  fact  that  he  may 
not  have  known  before.  The  sight  of  smoke  indi- 
cates the  presence  of  fire.  Human  footprints  in 
the  snow  are  undoubted  proof  that  some  one  has 
been  present. 

In  the  following  quotation  the  attacks  upon  the 
Monroe  Doctrine  by  the  South  American  repub- 
lics are  said  to  be  a  sign  that  these  countries  fear 
the  United  States: 

The  question  naturally  arises,  why  do  these  South  Amer- 
ican people  continually  attack  the  Monroe  Doctrine  instead 
of  expressing  at  least  some  degree  of  gratitude  for  the  pres- 
ent protection  which  it  gives  them  against  the  military 
powers  of  Europe?  The  answer  is  that  they  do  not  fear 
Europe,  actively  and  consciously,  but  do  fear  the  United 
States.^2 

12  North  American  Review,  198:781. 
141 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

The  strength  of  this  kind  of  reasoning  depends 
upon  the  closeness  of  the  connection  between  the 
effect  and  the  assigned  cause.  In  testing  argument 
from  sign,  one  should  ask: 

(i)  Is  the  alleged  cause  adequate  to  produce  the 
observed  effect? 

This  test  is  nearly  the  same  as  the  test  of  ade- 
quacy for  antecedent  probability.  One  could  not 
maintain  that  the  productiveness  of  a  certain  piece 
of  ground  was  due  entirely  to  the  kind  of  fertilizer 
used  on  it,  nor  that  a  national  financial  upheaval 
•was  caused  by  the  failure  of  a  single  unimportant 
bank.  In  each  of  these  cases  the  cause  suggested 
may  have  assisted  in  producing  the  result,  but  ob- 
viously it  w^as  not  of  itself  adequate  to  be  the  sole 
cause. 

(2)  Could  the  observed  effect  have  resulted 
from  any  other  cause  than  the  one  assigned? 

If  several  possible  causes  exist,  then  it  is  neces- 
sary to  consider  them  all,  and  show^  that  no 
cause  but  the  assigned  cause  produced  the  ob- 
served effect.  If  an  employer  who  has  been 
robbed  discovers  that  one  of  his  clerks  has  suddenly 
come  into  possession  of  a  large  sum  of  money,  he 
may  surmise  that  his  clerk  is  a  thief.  This  argu- 
m^ent  is  valueless,  however,  unless  he  can  show  that 

142 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

his  employee  did  not  receive  his  newly  acquired 
wealth  through  inheritance,  fortunate  investment, 
or  some  other  reasonable  method.  But  if  no  other 
reason  than  burglary  or  embezzlement  can  explain 
the  presence  of  this  money,  the  argument  is  very 
strong. 

One  might  greatly  weaken  the  argument  (quoted 
on  page  141)  which  assigned  the  cause  of  the  re- 
cent attacks  upon  the  Monroe  Doctrine  by  the 
South  American  countries  to  fear  of  the  United 
States  by  showing  that  this  action  was  not  the  re- 
sult of  the  assigned  cause  but  largely  of  another 
cause.  He  might  prove  that  these  republics  were 
fundamentally  friendly  to  the  United  States,  but 
had  sufficient  national  pride  to  wish  to  stand  alone 
in  the  eyes  of  the  world  without  having  any  pro- 
tecting arm  stretched  over  them. 

Argument  from  effect  to  effect.  Argument 
from  sign  also  includes  the  process  of  reasoning 
from  effect  to  effect  through  a  common  cause. 
This  method  consists  of  combining  the  process  just 
described  with  the  argument  from  antecedent  prob- 
ability. A  reduction  of  wages  in  one  cotton  mill 
is  a  sign  that  there  may  be  a  reduction  in  other 
cotton  mills.  Here  the  reasoning  goes  from  effect 
to  effect,  passing,  however,  though  perhaps  the 
143 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

reasoner  is  not  aware  that  the  process  is  so  com- 
plex, through  a  cause  common  to  both  effects.  In 
full,  the  reasoning  would  be:  a  reduction  in  the 
first  mill  is  the  result  of  the  cause  "  hard  times  " ; 
it  is  then  antecedently  probable  that  this  cause  will 
produce  a  similar  reduction  of  wages  in  other 
mills. 

This  method  may  be  represented  by  the  follow- 
ing figure: 

Cause 


Effect  Effect 


Only  one  effect  is  known;  the  other  effect  is 
inferred,  first,  by  a  process  of  reasoning  from  a 
known  effect  to  an  unknown  cause,  and  secondly, 
by  the  process  of  reasoning  from  this  assumed  cause 
to  an  unknown  effect. 

This  method  of  reasoning  is  sound  and  legitimate 
when  both  effects  have  the  same  cause.  Its  weak- 
ness lies  in  the  fact  that  it  may  be  attacked  on  two 
sides:  on  the  reasoning  from  effect  to  cause,  and 
on  the  reasoning  from  cause  to  effect.  If  the  con- 
144 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

nection  can  be  broken  in  either  process,  the  argu- 
ment is  overthrown.  The  tests  to  be  used  have  al- 
ready been  given. 


3.     ARGUMENT  FROM  EXAMPLE 

Argument  from  example  is  the  name  given  to 
the  process  by  which  one  reasons  that  what  has 
been  true  under  certain  circumstances  will  again 
be  true  under  the  same  or  similar  circumstances. 
In  using  this  method  of  reasoning  one  argues  that 
whenever  several  persons  or  things  or  conditions 
are  alike  in  some  respects,  any  given  cause  operat- 
ing upon  them  will  in  each  case  produce  the  same 
effect;  any  line  of  action  adopted  by  them  will  in 
each  case  have  the  same  result. 

There  are  two  divisions  of  argument  from  ex- 
ample. When  the  resemblance  between  the  things 
compared  is  close,  the  process  is  called  argument 
by  generalization ;  when  the  resemblance  is  so 
slight  that  there  can  be  no  direct  comparison,  but 
only  a  comparison  of  functions,  the  process  is 
called  argument  from  analogy. 

Argument  by  generalization.  If  one  finds  that 
a  certain  mastifif  becomes  with  training  an  excellent 
watch  dog,  he  may  reasonably  take  it  for  granted 
145 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

that  training  will  produce  the  same  result  in  an- 
other dog  of  the  same  breed.  If  a  college  student 
with  certain  pronounced  physical  and  mental  char- 
acteristics is  known  to  be  an  exceptionally  good 
football  player,  the  athletic  trainer  is  sure  to  rea- 
son by  generalization  that  another  student  with 
these  same  characteristics  w^ould  be  a  valuable  ad- 
dition to  the  team.  Burke  in  his  Speech  on  Con- 
ciliation uses  this  kind  of  reasoning  when  he  says 
that  just  as  Turkey  and  Spain  have  found  it  neces- 
sary to  govern  their  distant  possessions  with  a  loose 
rein,  so,  too,  England  will  be  obliged  to  govern  the 
American  Colonies  leniently. 

Following  is  a  short  quotation  that  illustrates  this 
method  of  argument: 

The  successful  business  man  insures  his  business  against 
fire,  and  the  practical  farmer  his  crops  against  storms,  and 
the  thoughtful  man  his  life  against  the  ravages  of  disease. 
Bank  deposits  are  just  as  susceptible  of  being  insured  as 
any  other  kind  of  property,  and  the  losses  resulting  from 
bank  failures  are  often  so  much  greater  and  so  much  m.ore 
severe  than  those  resulting  from  fire,  storms,  and  death  that 
all  reasons  against  insuring  them  fall  to  the  ground. 

Argument  by  generalization  very  rarely  consti- 
tutes absolute  proof.     In  dealing  with  things,  it  may 
do  so  in  rare  cases ;  in  dealing  with  human  actions, 
almost  never.    The  reason  why  it  can  establish  only 
146 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

a  strong  probability  lies  in  a  weakness  in  the  proc- 
ess of  reasoning. 

Notice  that  while  this  kind  of  argument  appar- 
ently reasons  directly  from  the  example  cited  to 
the  case  in  hand,  there  is  in  reality  an  intermediate 
step.  This  step  is  a  general  truth  of  which  both 
the  known  fact  and  the  fact  to  be  proved  must  be 
instances.  When  it  is  argued  that  since  one  mas- 
tiff makes  a  good  watch  dog  another  mastiff  will 
also  make  a  good  watch  dog,  the  reasoning  passes 
through  the  general  statement,  "  All  mastiffs  make 
good  watch  dogs." 

Graphically  the  process  might  be  represented 
thus: 

General  Law 


Known  Fact  Fact  to  be  Proved 


This  method  is  very  much  like  the  method  of 
reasoning  from  effect  to  effect,  except  that  here  the 
intermediate  step  does  not  cause,  but  merely  ac- 
counts for  the  facts.  In  the  illustration  taken  from 
Burke,  the  known  fact  is  that  neither  Turkey  nor 
Spain  can  govern  their  distant  provinces  despot- 
147 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

ically.  The  general  law  is  that  no  country  can 
govern  a  distant  dependency  harshly.  The  fact 
proved  is  that  England  cannot  play  the  despot  with 
the  American  colonies. 

The  weakness  of  this  sort  of  reasoning  is  now 
easily  seen.  In  the  first  place,  there  are  few  general 
laws  governing  human  action  that  always  hold  true. 
In  the  second  place,  unless  there  is  a  very  strong 
resemblance  between  the  cases  compared,  unless 
they  are  alike  in  all  essential  particulars,  they  will 
not  both  be  examples  of  the  working  of  one  general 
law. 

The  following  illustration  shows  how  argument 
by  generalization  may  frequently  be  attacked: 

The  claim  that  government  ownership  of  raih'oads  would 
be  a  success  in  the  United  States  because  government  own- 
ership has  succeeded  in  Germany  and  Belgium  fails  to  rec- 
ognize any  difference  between  their  form  of  government 
and  ours,  or  between  the  railroad  problems  presented  there 
and  here.  Not  to  mention  the  vast  difference  in  track  mile- 
age and  number  of  employees,  it  must  be  remembered  that 
the  inclination  of  the  German  mind  is  bureaucratic  and 
ours  is  just  the  opposite.  Their  system  has  been  con- 
structed under  supervision  of  the  State  and  there  are  prac- 
tically no  competing  lines ;  with  the  exception  of  a  few 
grants  of  land  our  system  has  been  built  independent  of  the 
government,  and  competing  lines  are  numerous.  Their 
trade  and  country  are  fully  developed  and  no  new  lines  are 
being  constructed. 

Germany  has  a  perfected  civil  service  of  long  standing, 
148 


The  Discussion— Conviction 

and  her  government  is  decidedly  executive  and  administra- 
tive in  form;  the  United  States  has  a  crude,  imperfect  civil 
service,  and  the  government  is  parliamentary  and  legisla- 
tive in  form.  These  important  differences  must  be  taken 
into  account  before  safe  conclusions  can  be  arrived  at,  and 
when  they  are  carefully  considered  the  fact  will  appear  that 
operations  of  our  roads  by  political  machinery  would  in  all 
probability  be  fraught  with  far  more  disastrous  evils  than 
are  sustained  at  present  under  private  management. 

Argument  from  analogy.  When  two  instances 
or  objects  which  are  unlike  in  themselves,  but  which 
perform  similar  functions  or  have  similar  relations, 
are  compared  for  the  sake  of  showing  that  what  is 
true  in  one  case  is  true  in  the  other,  the  process 
is  called  argument  from  analogy.  The  following 
quotation  is  a  good  illustration  of  this  kind  of  argu- 
ment : 

To  establish  bread  lines,  to  throw  open  churches,  to  pro- 
vide "  relief  works,"  is  usually  to  invite  endless  trouble 
and  to  do  untold  harm  to  the  honest  unemployed,  anxious 
and  willing  to  work,  those  who  for  the  first  time  are  obliged 
to  seek  relief.  Charity,  like  cocaine,  relieves  pain,  but  it 
creates  an  appetite.  Cocaine  should  be  administered  only 
upon  the  advice  of  a  physician.  Similarly,  relief  should  be 
administered  only  by  experienced  hands. 

Charity  and  cocaine  are  not  alike  in  themselves; 
they  cannot  be  directly  compared,  but  according  to 
this  illustration  they  are  alike  in  the  relations  they 
bear  to  certain  circumstances. 
149 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

When  President  Lincoln  refused  to  change  gener- 
als at  a  certain  time  during  the  Civil  War,  saying 
that  it  was  not  wise  to  "  swap  horses  while  crossing 
a  stream,"  he  reasoned  from  analog}\  Since  the 
horse  in  taking  its  master  across  the  stream  and  the 
general  in  conducting  a  campaign  are  totally  unlike 
in  themselves  but  have  similar  relations,  the  argu- 
ment is  from  analogy  and  not  from  generalization. 

It  is  easy  to  see  that  such  reasoning  never  con- 
stitutes indubitable  proof.  If  argument  from  gen- 
eralization, where  the  objects  compared  differ  from 
each  other  in  only  a  few  respects,  is  weak,  plainly, 
argument  from  analogy  is  much  weaker,  since  the 
objects  are  alike  merely  in  the  relations  they  bear. 

Though  argument  from  analogy  does  not  con- 
stitute proof,  yet  it  is  often  valuable  as  a  means  of 
illustration.  Truths  frequently  need  illumination 
more  than  verification,  and  in  such  cases  this  sort 
of  comparison  may  be  very  useful.  I\Iany  prov- 
erbs are  condensed  arguments  from  analogy,  their 
strength  depending  upon  the  similarity  between  the 
known  case  and  the  case  in  hand.  It  is  not  hard  to 
find  the  analogy  in  these  expressions :  "  Lightning 
never  strikes  twice  in  the  same  place " ;  "  Don't 
count  your  chickens  before  they  are  hatched " ; 
"  The  darkest  hour  is  just  before  dawn." 
150 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

The  student  who  has  carefully  read  this  chapter 
up  to  this  point  should  have  a  fairly  clear  idea 
of  the  nature  of  proof ;  he  should  know  that  proof 
consists  of  evidence  and  reasoning ;  he  should  know 
the  tests  for  each  of  these;  and  he  should  be  able 
to  distinguish  between  strong  and  weak  arguments. 
The  next  step  for  him  to  take  will  be  to  apply  these 
instructions  in  generating  proof  for  any  statement 
that  he  wishes  to  establish. 

A  common  fault  in  argumentation  is  the  failure 
to  support  important  points  with  sufficient  proof. 
One  or  two  points  well  established  will  go  farther 
toward  inducing  belief  in  a  proposition  than  a 
dozen  points  that  are  but  weakly  substantiated.  A 
statement  should  be  proved  not  only  by  inductive 
reasoning,  but,  if  possible,  by  deductive.  If  one 
uses  argument  from  antecedent  probability  in  estab- 
lishing a  statement,  he  should  not  rest  content  with 
this  one  method  of  proof,  but  he  should  try  also  to 
use  argument  from  sign,  and  argument  from  ex- 
ample, and,  whenever  he  can,  he  should  quote 
authority. 

Notice  that  in  the  following  outline  four  kinds 

of   proof   are   used.     The   amount  of   proof    here 

given  is  by  no  means  sufficient  to  establish  the  truth 

of  the  proposition  being  upheld;  the  outHne,  how- 

151 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

ever,  does  illustrate  the  proper  method  of  building 
up  the  proof  of  a  proposition : 

To  be  proved  —  x\n  educational  test  for  immi- 
grants would  benefit  the  United  States  politically. 

Sign 

I.  The  admittedly  unintelligent  votes  of  many 
of  the  foreign-born  citizens  in  the  United 
States  prove  that,  from  a  political  stand- 
point, our  immigration  laws  are  faulty. 

Antecedent  Probability 
II.     The  educational  test  would  allow  only  those 
people   who   are   intellectually   capable   of 
learning  about  our  institutions  to  enter  the 
United  States. 

Example 

III.  The  educational  test  for  immigrants  has  bene- 

fited political  conditions  in  Australia. 
(Prof.  Frank  Parsons,  Annals  of  Ameri- 
can Academy,  24:209.) 

Authority 

IV.  Such  men  as  Senators  Lodge  and  Dillingham 

testify  to  the  political  benefit  that  would 
be  derived  from  this  test.  {Survvey, 
25:604.) 

152 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

PERSUASION 

Though  it  has  been  stated  in  a  previous  chapter 
that  the  persuasive  portions  of  an  argument  should 
be  found  for  the  most  part  in  the  introduction  and 
the  conclusion,  still  persuasion  in  the  discussion  is 
extremely  important.  It  is,  true  that  the  real  work 
of  the  discussion  is  to  prove  the  proposition;  but 
if  conviction  alone  be  used,  there  is  great  danger, 
in  most  cases,  that  the  arguer  will  weary  his  audi- 
ence, lose  their  attention,  and  thus  fail  to  drive 
home  the  ideas  that  he  wishes  them  to  adopt.  Since 
everything  depends  upon  how  the  arguer  has  al- 
ready treated  his  subject,  and  how  it  has  been  re- 
ceived by  the  audience,  specific  directions  for  per- 
suasion in  the  discussion  cannot  possibly  be  given. 
Suggestions  in  regard  to  this  matter  must  be  even 
more  abstract  and  general  than  were  the  directions 
for  persuasion  in  the  introduction. 

To  begin  with,  persuasion  in  the  discussion  should 
usually  be  of  a  supplementary^  nature.  Unless  the 
arguer  has  won  the  attention  and,  to  some  extent  at 
least,  the  good  will  of  his  audience  before  he  com- 
mences upon  his  proof,  he  may  as  well  confess 
failure  and  proceed  no  farther.  If,  however,  the 
persuasiveness  of  his  introduction  has  accomplished 
153 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

the  purpose  for  which  it  exists,  he  may  introduce 
his  proof  without  hesitation,  taking  care  all  the 
time  to  interweave  enough  persuasion  to  main- 
tain the  favorable  impression  that  he  has  already 
made. 

In  general,  the  directions  for  doing  this  are  the 
same  as  those  for  securing  persuasion  in  the  intro- 
duction. In  both  divisions  modesty,  fairness,  and 
sincerity,  are  the  characteristics  that  make  for  suc- 
cess. The  same  conditions  that  demand  these 
qualities  in  one  place  require  their  use  throughout 
the  whole  argument.  Then,  too,  it  is  often  effec- 
tive to  make  occasionally  an  appeal  to  some  strong 
emotion.  As  a  rule,  the  attitude  of  the  modern 
audience  is  essentially  one  of  indifference,  of  so 
great  indiff'erence  that  special  eft'ort  must  be  made 
first  to  gain,  then  to  hold,  their  attention.  The 
direct  emotional  appeal,  when  the  subject,  the  oc- 
casion, and  the  audience  are  such  that  there  is  no 
danger  of  its  being  ludicrous,  will  usually  accom- 
plish this  result.  If  such  a  method,  however,  is 
manifestly  out  of  place,  other  means  must  be  sought 
for  producing  a  similar  effect. 

One  of  the  very  commonest  devices  for  gaining 
attention  is  to  relate  a  short  anecdote.  Ever}'body 
154 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

enjoys  a  good  story,  and  if  it  is  chosen  with  proper 
regard  for  its  illustrative  value,  the  argument  is 
sure  to  be  strengthened.  On  the  whole,  humorous 
stories  are  best.  They  often  reHeve  the  tedium  of 
an  otherwise  dry  speech,  and  not  only  serve  as  per- 
suasion, but  drive  home  a  point  with  greater  em- 
phasis than  could  the  most  elaborate  course  of 
reasoning.  The  following  is  an  example  of  this 
kind  of  story: 

I  am  reminded,  Mr.  President,  in  this  connection  of  an 
experience  that  I  had  when  I  was  the  manager  of  one  of 
the  mercantile  establishments  in  Utah.  I  sold  a  sack  of 
sugar  to  a  lady  in  my  home  town.  She  saw  the  name 
"  Lehi "  upon  the  bag  and  immediately  sent  it  back  and 
said  that  she  did  not  want  beet  sugar,  that  she  wanted  cane 
sugar,  because  she  could  not  make  cakes  and  pastry  so  well 
with  beet  sugar  as  with  cane.  She  happened  to  be  a  very 
close  relative  of  mine,  so  I  merely  took  the  same  sugar, 
put  it  into  a  cane  sugar  bag,  and  sent  the  same  sugar  back 
to  her.  About  a  week  after  she  met  me  and  said,  "  Now, 
don't  you  ever  send  me  any  more  beet  sugar ;  you  send  me 
the  kind  of  sugar  you  sent  me  the  last  time  —  cane  sugar." 
That  is  about  all  the  difference  there  is  in  it  —  the  brand 
upon  the  sack,  and  nothing  more.i^ 

Owing  to  the  limited  amount  of  time  at  their 
command,  student  debaters  can,  as  a  rule,  use  only 
the  very  shortest  stories,  and  these  should  be  chosen 

13  Reed  Smoot,  United  States  Senate,  Aug.  19,  19 13. 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

for  their  illustrative  rather  than  for  their  persuasive 
value;  in  written  arguments  greater  latitude  is  pos- 
sible. 

Another  method  that  often  finds  favor  in  both 
v^^itten  and  spoken  arguments  is  the  introduction 
of  a  paragraph  shov^^ing  the  importance  of  the  topic 
under  consideration  or  appealing  directly  to  some 
powerful  emotion.  Oftentimes  the  arguer  can 
show  that  this  particular  phase  of  the  subject  is  of 
wider  significance  than  at  first  appears.  Perhaps  he 
can  draw  a  picture  that  will  turn  a  seemingly  unin- 
teresting and  commonplace  subject  into  one  that  is 
teeming  with  romance  and  w^onderment.  The  fol- 
lowing persuasive  quotation,  taken  from  an  argu- 
ment on  the  tariff,  appeals  to  national  thrift  and 
pride.  Notice  that  in  this  isolated  paragraph  it  is 
impossible  to  tell  whether  the  argument  is  for  or 
against  the  imposition  of  customs  duties: 

A  nation  with  countless  thousands  of  acres  of  agricul- 
tural lands  capable  of  producing  almost  everything  through 
its  various  climates  which  comes  to  the  table  in  the  way  of 
necessaries,  a  nation  thus  equipped  ought  to  adopt  those 
poUcies  which  will  encourage  and  protect,  foster  and  build 
up  its  agricultural  interests.  We  ought  to  give  strength 
to  our  citizenship,  breadth  and  wholesomeness  to  our  civil- 
ization, health  and  permanency  to  our  social  order,  and 
economic  soundness  to  our  industrial  Hfe  by  encouraging 
men  to  leave  the  centers  of  population  and  gc  to  the  farms, 

iS6 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

by  preparing  In  a  distinct  and  settled  and  positive  way 
to  live  off  of  our  own  acres,  out  of  our  own  gardens,  and 
from  our  own  farms.^* 

These  devices  an  arguer  will  often  find  helpful 
for  bringing  an  element  of  persuasion  into  his  proof, 
but  he  should  aim  at  a  type  of  persuasion  much 
more  effective,  yet  much  harder  to  attain,  than  is 
the  result  of  any  mere  device.  Proof  is  the  strong- 
est when  each  separate  bit  of  it  appeals  both  to 
the  reason  and  the  emotions.  If  an  arguer  can 
connect  his  subject  with  the  feelings  of  his  audience 
and  then  introduce  reasoning  processes  that  will  at 
the  same  time  both  convince  them  and  play  upon 
their  feelings,  he  is  certain  to  attain  a  large  measure 
of  success.  Although  not  all  subjects  readily  lend 
themselves  to  this  method  of  treatment,  yet  if  the 
debater  will  go  to  the  very  bottom  of  his  subject 
and  consider  the  real  significance  of  the  question 
he  is  arguing  upon,  he  can  usually  succeed  in  mak- 
ing his  conviction  persuasive  and  his  persuasion 
convincing.  Undoubtedly  the  best  way  for  a  stu- 
dent to  train  himself  in  this  respect  is  to  study  great 
arguments.  The  following  quotation  from  an  ar- 
gument on  "  The  Philippines  "  is  an  excellent  ex- 
ample of  persuasive  proof: 

14  William  E,  Borah,  United  States  Senate,  Aug.  13,  1913. 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

Mr.  President,  the  times  call  for  candor.  The  Philip- 
pines are  ours  forever,  "territory  belonging  to  the  United 
States,"  as  the  Constitution  calls  them.  And  just  beyond 
the  Philippines  are  China's  illimitable  markets.  We  will 
not  retreat  from  either.  We  will  not  repudiate  our  duty 
in  the  Archipelago.  We  will  not  abandon  our  opportunity 
in  the  Orient.  We  will  not  renounce  our  part  in  the  mis- 
sion of  our  race :  trustee,  under  God,  of  the  civiHzation  of 
the  world.  And  we  will  move  forward  to  our  work,  not 
howling  out  regrets  Hke  slaves  whipped  to  their  burdens, 
but  with  gratitude  for  a  task  worthy  of  our  strength,  and 
thanksgiving  to  Almighty  God  that  he  has  marked  us  as 
His  chosen  people,  henceforth  to  lead  in  the  regeneration 
of  the  world. 

This  island  empire  is  the  last  land  left  in  all  the  oceans. 
If  it  should  prove  a  mistake  to  abandon  it,  the  blunder  once 
made  would  be  irretrievable.  If  it  proves  a  mistake  to  hold 
it,  the  error  can  be  corrected  when  we  will.  Every  other 
progressive  nation  stands  ready  to  relieve  us. 

But  to  hold  it  will  be  no  mistake.  Our  largest  trade 
henceforth  must  be  with  Asia.  The  Pacific  is  our  ocean. 
More  and  more  Europe  will  manufacture  the  most  it  needs ; 
secure  from  its  colonies  the  most  it  consumes.  Where  shall 
we  turn  for  consumers  of  our  surplus?  Geography  an- 
swers the  question.  China  is  our  natural  customer.  She 
is  nearer  to  us  than  to  England,  Germany,  or  Russia  —  the 
commercial  powers  of  the  present  and  the  future.  They 
have  moved  nearer  to  China  by  securing  permanent  bases  on 
her  borders.  The  Philippines  give  us  a  base  at  the  door  of 
all  the  East. 

Lines  of  navigation  from  all  our  ports  to  the  Orient  and 
AustraHa,  from  the  Isthmian  Canal  to  Asia,  from  all  Orien- 
tal ports  to  Australia,  converge  at  and  separate  from  the 
Philippines.  They  are  a  self-supporting,  dividend-paying 
fleet,  permanently  anchored  at  a  spot  selected  by  the  strategy 
of  Providence,  commanding  the  Pacific.     And  the  Pacific 

158 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

is  the  ocean  of  the  commerce  of  the  future.  Most  future 
wars  will  be  conflicts  for  commerce.  The  power  that  rules 
the  Pacific,  therefore,  is  the  power  that  rules  the  world. 
And,  with  the  Philippines,  that  power  is  and  will  forever 
be  the  American  Republic. 

China's  trade  is  the  mightiest  fact  in  our  future.  Her 
foreign  commerce  was  $285,738,300  in  1897,  of  which  we, 
her  neighbor,  had  less  than  nine  per  cent.,  of  which  only 
a  little  more  than  half  was  merchandise  sold  to  China  by 
us.  We  ought  to  have  fifty  per  cent.,  and  we  will.  And 
China's  foreign  commerce  is  only  beginning.  Her  re- 
sources, her  possibilities,  her  wants,  all  are  undeveloped. 
She  has  only  340  miles  of  railway.  I  have  seen  trains 
loaded  with  natives  and  all  the  activities  of  modern  life  al- 
ready appearing  along  the  line.  But  she  needs,  and  in  fifty 
years  will  have,  20,000  miles  of  railroad. 

Who  can  estimate  her  commerce  then?  That  statesman 
commits  a  crime  against  American  trade  —  against  the 
American  grower  of  cotton  and  wheat  and  tobacco,  the 
American  manufacturer  of  machinery  and  clothing  —  who 
fails  to  put  America  where  she  may  command  that  trade. 
Germanj'^'s  Chinese  trade  is  increasing  like  magic.  She  has 
established  ship  lines  and  secured  a  tangible  foothold  on 
China's  very  soil.  Russia's  Chinese  trade  is  growing  be- 
yond belief.  She  is  spending  the  revenues  of  the  Empire 
to  finish  her  railroad  into  Peking  itself,  and  she  is  in  phys- 
ical possession  of  the  imperial  province  of  Manchuria. 
Japan's  Chinese  trade  is  multipHed  in  volume  and  value. 
She  is  bending  her  energy  to  a  merchant  marine,  and  is  lo- 
cated along  China's  very  coast ;  but  Manila  is  nearer  China 
than  Yokohama  is.  The  Philippines  command  the  com- 
mercial situation  of  the  entire  East.  Can  America  best 
trade  with  China  from  San  Francisco  or  New  York?  From 
San  Francisco,  of  course.  But  if  San  Francisco  were 
closer  to  China  than  New  York  is  to  Pittsburgh,  what  then  ? 
And  Manila  is  nearer  Hongkong  than  Havana  is  to  Wash- 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

ington.  And  yet  American  statesmen  plan  to  surrender 
this  commercial  throne  of  the  Orient  where  Providence  and 
our  soldiers'  lives  have  placed  us.  When  history  comes  to 
write  the  story  of  that  suggested  treason  to  American  su- 
premacy, and  therefore  to  the  spread  of  American  civiliza- 
tion, let  her  in  mercy  write  that  those  who  so  proposed 
were  merely  blind  and  nothing  more.^^ 


EXERCISES 

A.  Point  out  the  kind  of  reasoning  found  in  each  of  the 
following  arguments  : 

1.  Since  he  was  a  brilliant  athlete,  it  is  likely  that  he 
will  be  a  brilHant  soldier. 

2.  Nothing  produced  by  man  is  perfect,  and  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  was  written  by  mortal  men. 

3.  The  cracked  earth,  the  parched  grass,  and  the  dry 
streams  showed  that  for  months  there  had  been  no  rainfall. 

4.  Because  his  name  is  found  in  Who's  Who  in  America^ 
John  Doe  may  be  considered  a  famous  man. 

5.  To  prove  that  woman  suffrage  is  a  success,  I  have 
merely  to  point  to  such  States  as  Wyoming,  Oregon,  Colo- 
rado, Wisconsin,  Illinois. 

6.  Sooner  or  later  the  ravages  of  the  boll  weevil  will 
compel  Southern  planters  to  raise  a  diversification  of  crops. 

7.  An  educational  test  for  immigrants  would  benefit  the 
condition  of  our  cities,  because  with  this  test  in  operation 
our  slums  would  be  less  congested. 

8.  It  is  perfectly  plain  that  if  you  make  the  occupation  of 
farming  so  unprofitable  that  farmers  leave  their  land  uncul- 
tivated, prices  will  be  dearer  and  the  cost  of  living  higher. 

g.  Would  you  put  your  money  into  a  bank  if  you  knew 
that  all  its  officers,  from  president  to  bookkeeper,  were  to 
be  changed  every  few  years?    Yet  such  a  system  would  be 

15  Albert  J.  Beveridge,  United  States  Senate,  Jan.  9,   1900. 
160 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

no  worse  than  the  spoils  system  which  prevails  in  so  many 
departments  of  our  government. 

10.  The  recent  great  expansion  in  the  manufacturing  in- 
dustries in  Canada  is  strong  evidence  that  capitalists  in  the 
United  States  and  the  United  Kingdom  have  the  utmost  con- 
fidence in  the  commercial  future  of  the  Dominion. 

11.  Athens,  Rome,  Spain  fell  because  their  wealth  came 
not  from  the  successful  cultivation  of  their  own  soil  or  from 
the  intelligent  development  of  their  commerce,  but  from 
tribute  levied  upon  other  countries.  Let  the  United  States 
learn  this  lesson  well. 

12.  It  is  a  well-recognized  principle  that  the  man  who 
"  totes  "  a  revolver  is  far  more  liable  to  get  into  trouble 
than  the  man  who  carries  only  the  weapons  nature  gave 
him.  So  it  is  with  nations ;  large  armies  and  navies  do  not 
make  for  peace. 

13.  As  proof  that  political  considerations  exert  a  strong 
influence  on  the  rates  of  government-owned  railroads,  wit- 
ness the  Intercolonial  Railway  of  Canada.  Its  rates  are 
thirty  per  cent,  lower  than  the  average  on  the  other  railways 
of  the  country  —  and  for  years  it  has  not  earned  the  interest 
on  its  bonded  debt. 

14.  If  the  prosperity  of  Crawford  County  may,  as  many 
believe,  be  fairly  attributed  to  its  good  roads,  then  Rocking- 
ham County,  which  is  starting  in  on  an  era  of  good  road 
building,  may  expect  to  become  a  thriving  section  of  the 
State. 

15.  The  fact  that  our  battleships  spend  more  time  in  tar- 
get practice  than  the  ships  of  any  other  nation  leads  me 
to  believe  that  our  gunners  are  the  best  in  the  world. 

16.  In  the  old  days  men  in  England  suffered  as  the 
vvomen  do  now,  but  since  they  got  political  power  they 
have  altered  all  that.  The  cheap  labor  of  women  is  not  a 
local  difficulty  that  can  be  remedied  by  local  means ;  it  is  a 
national  difficulty,  and  nothing  less  than  a  national  reform, 
giving  women  the  protection  of  political  power,  can  make 

161 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

any  really  effective  change  in  their  position.     So  wc  are 
agitating  for  votes  for  women. 

B.  Apply  the  tests  for  evidence  and  reasoning  to  the 
arguments  found  in  the  following  passage : 

x\thletics  Foster  Dishonesty 

Training  for  a  college  team  in  these  days  furnishes  a  drill 
in  complex  dishonesty  which  far  overbalances  any  benefits 
that  may  be  derived  —  at  least  that  is  the  belief  of  many 
careful  observers.  In  competition  among  gentlemen  there 
is  no  place  for  the  man  who  "  stacks  "  the  cards  and  sig- 
nals his  partner  across  the  table;  who  deHberately  miscalls 
the  score  at  tennis;  or  v/ho  picks  his  ball  out  of  a  bad  lie 
on  the  golf  links.  He  is  barred  from  respectable  clubs,  and 
is  not  welcomed  in  respectable  society.  Yet  college  men, 
so  often  the  soul  of  honor  in  all  their  other  activities,  see 
no  wrong  in  deliberately  and  slyly  violating  in  football, 
baseball,  and  kindred  sports  any  rule  that  may  diminish 
their  chances  of  victory.  The  progress  of  every  football 
game  is  interrupted  by  the  referee's  penalizing  first  one  side, 
then  the  other,  and  the  guilty  players  lose  standing  only 
in  so  far  as  the  coach  scolds  them  for  being  caught. 

Not  many  years  ago  a  football  coach,  a  business  man  of 
good  repute,  enjoying  the  confidence  of  faculty  and  un- 
dergraduates alike,  was  seen  drilling  his  linemen  in  an 
illegal  play,  the  essence  of  which  was  to  swing  the  fist  vio- 
lently into  the  opponent's  face.  After  some  minutes  he 
vented  his  disgust  with  an  awkward  pupil  in  these  words: 

"  Not  that  way,  not  that  way,  you  boob !  You  have  got 
to  be  nifty  to  get  away  with  that  play." 

The  question  of  the  eligibility  of  men  to  represent  their 
colleges  in  intercollegiate  contests  calls  forth  tactics  similar 
to  those  in  vogue  in  the  actual  conduct  of  the  games.  There 
is  a  rule  in  many  colleges  providing  that  no  man  who  has 
competed  for  money  shall  play  on  a  college  team,  and  every 
162 


The  Discussion- — Conviction 

candidate  is  required  to  give  a  signed  statement  that  he  has 
not  violated  this  rule.  In  spite  of  these  requirements  there 
are  charges  and  counter-charges  of  professionalism  made 
by  one  college  against  another.  Every  charge  of  profes- 
sionalism is  an  accusation  of  lying  against  the  m.an  involved. 

Another  eligibility  rule  in  effect  in  most  colleges  is  that 
no  man  shall  compjste  in  athletics  more  than  four  years,  yet 
the  papers  and  magazines  are  filled  with  accounts  of  men 
who,  after  representing  a  small  Western  college  for  a  year 
or  more,  have  entered  a  large  Eastern  university  and  played 
under  its  colors  for  a  full  four  years.  To  do  this  they  had 
to  deny  their  participation  in  athletics  at  the  first  institution. 

If  practices  like  this  involved  only  the  guilty  player,  they 
could  be  attributed  to  the  "  black  sheep  "  sure  to  be  found 
in  every  group  of  men,  and  would  not  be  ground  for  the 
arraignment  of  college  athletics  in  general.  They  are,  how- 
ever, known  to  the  other  players  and  the  undergraduates. 
In  fact,  colleges  have  become  so  imbued  w^ith  the  spirit  of 
"anything  to  win,"  that  the  athletes  themselves  are  pos- 
sibly less  guilty  than  the  whole  mass  of  alumni  and  under- 
graduates who  encourage  their  trickery-  and  deceit. 

C.  Prove  or  disprove  the  following  statements,  using, 
wherever  it  is  possible,  argument  from  antecedent  prob- 
ability, sign,  example,  and  authority.  Give  references  for 
all  evidence  except  generally  admitted  facts. 

1.  Government  by  commission  is  a  success  in  Des  Moines, 
Iowa. 

2.  Hazing  tends  to  destroy  college  spirit. 

3.  Indiscriminate  novel  reading  is  intellectually  harm- 
ful. 

4.  Playing  football  is  physically  injurious. 

5.  Capital  punishment  for  murder  is  morally  unjustifiable. 

6.  Final  examinations  in  college  courses  are  physically 
harmful. 

7.  Woman  suffrage  purifies  politics. 

163 


The  Discussion — Conviction 

8.  Frequent  attendance   at  moving  pictures   injures  the 
eyesight. 

9.  Compulsory  education  of  children  in  the  United  States 
benefits  the  public  at  large. 

10.  The  destruction  of  forests  in  the  United  States  has 
aflfected  the  water  supply  of  brooks  and  rivers. 


164 


CHAPTER  VII 
THE  DISCUSSION —  BRIEF-DRAWIN'G 

The  second  division  of  a  brief  corresponding  to 
the  second  division  of  a  complete  argument,  is  called 
the  discussion.  In  this  part  of  his  brief  the  arguer 
logically  arranges  all  the  evidence  and  reasoning 
that  he  wishes  to  use  in  establishing  or  overthrow- 
ing his  proposition.  Illustrative  material,  rhetori- 
cal embelHshment,  and  other  forms  of  persuasion 
that  may  enter  into  the  finished  argument  are 
omitted,  but  the  real  proof  is  complete  in  the  brief. 

There  are  two  possible  systems  of  arranging 
proof.  For  the  sake  of  convenience  they  may  be 
called  the  "  because  "  method  and  the  *'  therefore  " 
method.  These  methods  derive  their  names  from 
the  connectives  that  are  used.  When  the  "  be- 
cause "  method  is  used,  the  proof  follows  the  state- 
ment being  established,  and  is  connected  to  this 
statement  with  some  such  word  as :  as,  because,  for, 
or  since.     To  illustrate : 

I6S 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

I.     Expenses  at  a  country  college  are  less  than  at 
a  city  college,  because 

A.  At    the    countr}^    college    room    rent    is 

cheaper. 

B.  Table  board  costs  less. 

C.  Amusement  places  are  less  numerous. 
Under  the  "  therefore "  method,  the  proof  pre- 
cedes the  statement  being  established;  the  connec- 
tives are  hence  and  therefore.  The  previous  argu- 
ment arranged  in  this  form  would  read  as  fol- 
lows : 

A.  Since  room  rent  is  cheaper  at  the  country 

college  than  at  the  city  college,  and 

B.  Since  table  board  costs  less,  and 

C.  Since  amusement  places  are  less  numer- 

ous, therefore 
I.     Expenses  at  a  country  college  are  less  than 

at  a  city  college. 
The  student  should  always  use  the  '''  because " 
m.ethod  of  arrangement.  It  is  preferable  to  the 
"  therefore  "  method  since  it  affords  a  much  easier 
apprehension  of  the  argument  advanced.  If  the 
reader  of  the  brief  has  the  conclusion  in  his  mind 
at  the  very  start,  he  can  test  the  strength  and  ade- 
quacy of  the  proof  very  quicldy,  and  can,  perhaps, 
the  first  time  he  reads  the  argument  form  an  opinion 
i66 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

as  to  its  worth.  But  he  will  almost  always  have 
difficulty  in  grasping  the  significance  of  evidence 
and  reasoning  before  he  knows  what  the  proof  is 
expected  to  prove.  The  "  therefore  "  method  usu- 
ally obliges  a  careful  reasoner,  after  finally  reaching 
the  conclusion,  to  go  over  the  whole  proof  a  second 
time. 

To  assist  the  student  in  carrying  out  the  proper 
arrangement  of  his  proof,  two  rules  have  been 
formulated.  One  rule  deals  with  main  headings, 
the  headings  marked  with  the  Roman  numerals; 
the  other  deals  with  subordinate  headings. 

Rule  IX.  Phrase  each  principal  statement  in  the 
discussion  so  that  it  will  read  as  a  reason  for  the 
truth  or  the  falsity  of  the  proposition. 

Rule  X.  Phrase  each  subordinate  statement  in 
the  discussion  so  that  it  luill  read  as  a  reason  for 
the  truth  of  the  statement  to  which  it  is  subordinate. 
The  connectives  to  be  used  are:  as,  because,  for, 
and  since. 

In  connection  with  the  first  of  these  rules,  notice 
that  principal  headings  read  as  reasons  for  the  truth 
or  the  falsity  of  the  proposition.  Obviously  they 
read  as  reasons  for  the  truth  if  the  brief  is  on 
the  affirmative  side,  and  for  the  falsity  if  the 
brief  is  on  the  negative  side.  Headings  and  sub- 
167 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

headings  should  always  be  supported,  not  demol- 
ished. 

The  error  of  making  unsupported  statements 
in  a  complete  argument  has  already  been  discussed. 
Assertion  in  a  brief  is  equally  faulty.  To  insure 
belief,  all  statements  must  rest  ultimately  either 
upon  the  testimony  of  witnesses  or  upon  statements 
admitted  to  be  true. 

Notice,  for  example,  in  the  discussion  of  the  brief 
that  begins  on  page  172,  how  worthless  would  be 
the  statements  marked  with  capital  letters  were  they 
not  supported  with  proof.     Hence  the  rule : 

Rule  XI.  Make  no  unsupported  statements  un- 
less they  are  generally  admitted  to  he  true. 

It  has  already  been  shown  that  the  arguer  must 
reveal  to  his  audience  the  sources  from  which  he 
gathered  his  evidence.  If  he  gained  certain  in- 
formation from  magazines,  he  should  state  definitely 
the  name,  the  volume,  and  the  page;  if  he  gained 
his  information  elsewhere,  he  should  be  equally 
explicit.  Since  this  knowledge  of  the  source  of 
the  evidence  is  essential  to  the  success  of  the  proof, 
a  statement  of  the  sources  is  a  part  of  the  work  of 
conviction.  Accordingly,  these  sources  must  be 
stated  in  the  brief  as  well  as  in  the  expanded  argu- 
ment.   Thus  the  rule : 

168 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

Rule  XIL  After  all  evidence  state  in  parentheses 
the  source  from  which  it  came. 

In  addition  to  establishing  the  side  of  the  propo- 
sition which  it  advocates,  a  good  brief  almost  in- 
variably refutes  the  main  arguments  of  the  oppo- 
site side.  The  way  in  which  this  refutation  is  ex- 
pressed is  very  important.  A  brief  on  the  affirma- 
tive side  of  the  proposition,  ''Resolved,  That  the 
Federal  government  should  acquire  and  operate  the 
telegraph  systems  within  the  United  States,"  would 
be  weak  and  ludicrous,  if,  when  answering  the  ar- 
gument of  the  negative  that  the  cost  would  be 
prohibitive,  it  should  contain  the  following  reason- 
ing: 

The  Federal  government  should  acquire  and  op- 
erate the  telegraph  systems  in  the  United  States,  be- 
cause 

I.     The  cost  of  acquiring  the  systems  would  not  be 
prohibitive. 

One  might  think  from  such  a  statement  that  the 
drawer  of  the  brief  considered  the  contention  that 
the  expense  would  not  be  too  great,  a  constructive 
argument  in  favor  of  government  ownership.  In 
reality,  it  is  nothing  of  the  sort.  The  arguer  is 
merely  trying  to  destroy  his  opponent's  argument 
to  the  effect  that  expense  is  an  obstacle  in  the  way 
169 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

of  the  proposed  plan.  This  refutation  should  be 
expressed  in  such  a  manner  as  to  show  that  it  is 
refutation  and  not  positive  proof.  It  might  well 
read  thus: 

The  Federal  government  should  acquire  and  op- 
erate the  telegraph  systems  in  the  United  States, 
because 

I.     The  contention  of  the  negative  that  the  cost  of 
acquiring  the  systems  would  be  prohibitve  is 
unsound,  since 
A.     Etc. 

Notice  that  this  form  of  refutation  states  clearly 
the  argument  to  be  answered.  No  doubt  can  arise 
from  such  a  statement  as  to  the  direction  the  argu- 
ment is  taking;  no  confusion  can  occur  between 
refutation   and   positive  proof.     Hence   the    rule: 

Rule  XIII.  Phrase  refutation  so  that  the  argu- 
ment to  be  answered  is  clearly  stated. 

THE  CONCLUSION 

As  there  is  but  one  rule  for  brief-drawing  that 
applies  to  the  conclusion,  it  may  well  be  given  at 
this  point.  The  purpose  and  the  value  of  this  rule 
are  so  apparent  that  no  explanation  is  necessary. 

Rule  XIV.  Put  into  the  conclusion  a  summary 
of  the  essential  points  established  in  the  discussion. 
170 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

RULES  FOR  BRIEF-DRAWING 
General  Rules 

I.  Divide  the  brief  into  three  parts,  and  mark 
them  respectively,  Introduction,  Discussion,  and 
Conclusion. 

II.  Express  each  idea  in  the  brief  in  the  form  of 
a  complete  statement. 

III.  Make  in  each  statement  only  a  single  asser- 
tion. 

IV.  Make  each  statement  as  concise  as  is  con- 
sistent  with  clearness. 

V.  Indicate  the  relation  between  statements  by 
indentation  and  by  the  use  of  symbols. 

VI.  Mark  each  statement  with  only  one  symbol. 

Rules  for  the  Introduction 

VII.  Put  into  the  introduction  suifici^nt  expla- 
nation for  a  complete  understanding  of  the  discus- 
sion. This  explanation  usually  involves  (a)  a  defi- 
nition of  terms,  (b)  an  explanation  of  the  meaning 
of  the  proposition,  (c)  a  statement  of  the  issues,  and 
(d)  the  partition. 

VIII.  Put  into  the  introduction  only  statements 
admitted  by  both  sides. 

171 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

Rules  for  the  Discussion 

IX.  Phrase  each  principal  statement  in  the  dis- 
cussion so  that  it  will  read  as  a  reason  for  the  truth 
or  the  falsity  of  the  proposition. 

X.  Phrase  each  subordinate  statement  in  the  dis- 
cussion so  that  it  will  read  as  a  reason  for  the  truth 
of  the  statement  to  zvhich  it  is  subordinate.  The 
connectives  to  be  used  are:  as,  because,  for,  and 
since. 

XL  Make  no  unsupported  statements  unless 
they  are  generally  admitted  to  be  true. 

XII.  After  all  evidence  state  in  parentheses  the 
source  from  which  it  came. 

XIII.  Phrase  refutation  so  that  the  argument 
to  be  answered  is  clearly  stated. 

Rule  for  the  Conclusion 

XIV.  Put  into  the  conclusion  a  summary  of  the 
essential  points  established  in  the  discussion. 

MODEL  BRIEF 

Resolved,  That  the  Federal  government  should 
cooperate  with  the  several  States  in  the  permanent 
improvement  of  the  public  highways. 


17: 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 
Affirmative  Brief 

INTRODUCTION 

I.  The  recent  introduction  into  Congress  of 
eighty- three  bills  providing  for  Federal  as- 
sistance in  the  improvement  of  public  high- 
ways has  brought  the  matter  of  good  roads 
prominently  before  the  public. 

A.  The  Federal  government  first  began  to 

be  interested  in  highways  in  1893. 

B.  During   that   3^ear   Congress   established 

the  Office  of  Road  Inquiry  under  the 
Department  of  Agriculture. 

1.  This  office  has  acted  in  an  advisory 

capacity    to   the   various    political 
units  that  have  sought  assistance. 

2.  It  has   built   object-lesson    roads   in 

thirty-four  different  States. 
II.     At  the  present  time  public  highways  are  built 
and    controlled    by    towns,    counties,    and 
States. 
A.     Each  State  has  its  own  method  of  caring 
for  its  roads. 
III.     The  proposed  plan  provides  that  the  Federal 
government  shall  contribute  money  to  im- 
prove the  roads  in  each  State  in  the  Union. 
173 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

A.  The    roads    on    which   any   government 

money  is  expended  shall  be  known  as 
government  roads. 

B.  The  money  contributed  by  the  govern- 

ment to  any  State  shall  be  in  direct 
proportion  to  the  money  raised  by  that 
State  for  the  building  of  these  govern- 
ment roads. 

C.  All  government  roads  shall  be  built  and 

afterwards  supervised  by  the  Office  of 
Public  Roads  in  Washington. 
IV.     To   determine   whether  the   Federal  govern- 
ment should  aid  the  States  in  the  improve- 
ment of  their  highways,  the  following  ques- 
tions must  be  answered : 

A.  Do  improved  highways  concern  the  na- 

tion as  a  whole  ? 

B.  Have  the  present  systems  of  road  con- 

trol been  a  success  or  a  failure  ? 

C.  If    the   present    systems   have   not   suc- 

ceeded, is  Federal  aid  the  proper  rem- 
edy? 
V.     The  affirmative  will  establish  the   following 
facts  : 
A.     Good  roads  increase  the  prosperity  of  the 
nation  as  a  whole. 
174 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

B.  The  present  systems  of  road  control  have 

failed. 

C.  Federal  aid   is   the  proper  remedy   for 

present  conditions. 

DISCUSSION 

I.     Good    roads   increase   the   prosperity   of   the 
nation  as  a  whole,  for 
A.    They  benefit  the  farmer,  since 

1.  They  lower  his  cost  of  transporta- 

tion to  market,  because 

a.  In    Spottsylvania    County,    Va., 

the  building  of  good  roads 
lowered  the  cost  of  transporta- 
tion on  highways  eight  cents  a 
ton  for  each  mile.  (L.  D. 
Hewes,  Dep't.  of  Agriculture, 
World's  Work,  24:688.) 

b.  In  Harris  County,  Texas,  the  sav- 

ings was  seven  cents  a  ton  for 
each  mile.     (Ibid.) 

2.  Good    roads    stimulate    business    in 

rural  communities,  since 
a.     After  the  building  of  good  roads 
in    Spottsylvania    County    the 
shipment   of    agricultural   and 

175 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

forest  products  increased  forty- 
nine  per  cent.    (Ibid.) 

3.  Good  roads  enable  the  farmer  to  take 

advantage  of  fluctuations  in  the 
price  of  his  products,  because 
a.  In  sections  of  the  South  that 
have  good  roads  planters  rush 
their  cotton  to  market  when 
the  price  advances.  (Country 
Life  in  America,  25:54.) 

4.  Good   roads   increase  the  value  of 

farm  land,  for 

a.  After    the   construction   of    350 

miles  of  improved  road  the  as- 
sessed valuation  of  Harris 
County,  Texas,  increased  %72y- 
000,000.  (L.  D.  Hewes, 
World's  Work,  24:688.) 

b.  The  average  value  of  land  in  six- 

teen counties  in  Ohio  having 
less  than  ten  per  cent,  of  their 
roads  improved  is  $45  an  acre. 
{Ihid.) 

c.  The   average   value   of   land   in 

forty-five  Ohio  counties  having 
ten   per   cent,   of   their   roads 
176 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

improved  is  ^66  an  acre. 
(Ibid.) 

d.  Since  the  beginning  of  an   im- 

proved road  system  in  Massa- 
chusetts, tlie  value  of  land  has 
increased  from  $2  to  $10  an 
acre.  (Director  of  Office  of 
Public  Roads,  U.  S.  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture,  World's 
Work,  24:679.) 

e.  In  one  year  more  famis  were  sold 

on  the  improved  roads  in  Spott- 
sylvania  County,  Va.,  than  in 
the  five  years  preceding  the  im- 
provement.    (L.     J.     Graves, 
World's  Work,  24:689.) 
5.     Good  roads  give  the  farmer  better  so- 
cial   and    educational    advantages, 
since 

a.  They  enable  him  to  attend  church 

more  easily. 

b.  They  enable  him  to  send  his  chil- 

dren to  school,  for 
i'.     School  attendance  In  Spott- 
sylvania  County,  Va.,  in- 
creased  with  good  roads 
^77 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

from   5   to   35   per   cent. 
(James      Ashley,      Divi- 
sion    Superintendent     of 
Schools,    World's    Work, 
24:690.) 
2'.     Similar      investigations     in 
thirteen     other     counties 
reveal      similar      results. 
(Ibid.) 
B.     Good    roads   benefit   the   inhabitants   of 
cities,   because 

1.  They  enable  city  dwellers  to  have  a 

better   and   more   uniform   supply 
of  farm  products,  for 
a.     Good  roads  mean  quicker  trans- 
portation. 

2.  They    enable    city    dwellers    to   buy 

farm  products  cheaper,  since 
a.  At  present  the  wagon  haul  to 
and  from  the  railroad  is  rela- 
tively the  greater  part  of  the 
cost  of  transportation.  (North 
American  Reviei'o,  198:321.) 

3.  Stimulation  of  business  in  the  coun- 

try means  stimulation  of  business 
in  the  city. 

178 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

4.  The    improvement   of    social    condi- 

tions in  the  country  will  tend  to 
relieve  tlie  congestion  of  the  cit- 
ies. 

5.  Good   roads   open   up   a   wonderful 

pleasure  ground  to  city  people,  as 

a.     In   19 1 2   there   were   over  600,- 

000     auto     vehicles     in     the 

United  States. 

II.     The   present   systems   of    road   control    have 

failed,   for 

A.  Local    officers    are    often    unduly    influ- 

enced by  local  conditions,  because 
I.    They  feel  bound  to  favor  the  men 
who  have  elected  them  to  office. 
(Outlook,  84:217.) 

B.  Local  officers  are  often  incompetent,  for 

1.  The  office  does  not  pa}^  sufficiently 

well  to  attract  experts. 

2.  Costly  blunders  are  frequently  made, 

since 
a.  In  Pendleton  County,  W.  Va.,  a 
fill  made  of  logs  v/as  burned 
by  a  forest  fire  almost  as  soon 
as  it  was  finished.  (World's 
Work,  24:680.) 
179 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

b.     A    Texas    county    built    several 
miles   of  macadam  road  with 
material  lacking  in  cementing 
qualities.     (Ibid.) 
3.     Lack   of   knowledge  of   system  has 
frequently  brought   disastrous   re- 
sults.     (J.   E.   Pennybacker,   Sec- 
retary   of    American    Association 
for        Highway        Improvement, 
World's  Work,  24:  690.) 
C.     State  work  is  hampered  by  its  connec- 
tion with  politics,  as 
I.     On  account  of  the  general  change  in 
the  political  situation  the  highway 
departments     of     the     following 
States    were    seriously    interfered 
with:     Maine,     New    Hampshire, 
Massachusetts,  Rhode  Island,  Con- 
necticut, New  York,  New  Jersey, 
Pennsylvania,      ]\Iar)'land,     West 
Virginia,  Ohio,  Washington.     (L. 
W.  Page,  World's  Work,  24:  676.) 
D.    Under  town,  county,  and  State  control, 
only  a  ridiculously  small  percentage  of 
our  roads  has  been  improved,  for 
I.     In  1909  we  had  improved  only  7.14 
180 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

per    cent,    of    our    roads.     (Put- 
nam's Magadne,  6:781.) 

2,  In  1 91 2  we  had  improved  only  10 

per  cent,  of  our  roads.     {World's 
Work,  24:676.) 

3.  We  are  spending  yearly  on  our  2,- 

250,000  miles  of  road  about  the 
same  amount  that  England  spends 
on  her  150,000  miles.     (Ibid.) 
III.     Federal  aid  is  the  proper  remedy  for  present 
conditions,  for 
A.     The    Federal    government    has    already 
demonstrated  its  ability  to  handle  the 
work,  since 
I.    The  Office  of  Public  Roads  has  con- 
structed   over    200    object-lesson 
roads     in     thirty-four     different 
States.        (Putnam's      Magazine, 
7:688.) 
'2.     It  has  tested  over  3,000  samples  of 
road  materials  from  every  State  in 
the  Union  to  determine  their  value 
for  road  building.     (Ibid.) 
3.    The   laboratories   of   this  office   are 
recognized  as  the  foremost  in  the 
world,  because 
181 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

a.     The  British  government  has  sub- 
mitted to  it  for  analysis  300 
specimens  of   road  materials. 
(Ibid.) 
4.     Consultation  with  this  office  in  1904 
saved  Pike  County,  Ala.,  an  initial 
expense  of  $500,000  in  the  build- 
ing    of      115     miles     of     road. 
(World's  Work,  24:680.) 

B.  Tne  various  States  would  be  willing  to 

spend  much  more  of  their  own  m^oney 

on  roads,  because 

I.    They   would   receive   aid   from   the 

government  only  in  proportion  to 

the  money  they  raised  themselves. 

C.  The  roads  would  be  built  where  they  are 

the  most  needed,  for 
I.     Local  politics  and  jealousies  would 
not  determine  their  location. 

D.  The    roads    would    be   built   most    eco- 

nomically and  permanently,  since 
I.     Only  experts  would  have  charge  of 
their  construction,  because 
a.     This  work  would  all  be  in  the 
hands  of  the  Office  of  Public 
Roads. 
182 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

CONCLUSION 

I.  The  affirmative  has  proved  that  the  Federal 
government  should  cooperate  with  the  sev- 
eral States  in  the  permanent  improvement 
of  the  public  highways  for  the  following 
reasons : 

A.  Good  roads  increase  the  prosperity  of 

the  nation  as  a  whole. 

B.  The   present    systems    of    road    control 

have  failed. 

C.  Federal   aid   is  the  proper   remedy   for 

present  conditions. 

EXERCISES 
Brief  the  following  articles: 

I.  Shall  Officers  be  Substituted  for  Civilian 
Instructors  ? 

The  proposed  substitution  of  officers  for  civilian  in- 
structors at  the  Naval  Academy  is  indefensible  from  every 
point  of  view.  The  net  result  of  this  policy  would  be  that 
officers  would  be  withdrawn  from  their  national  duties  to 
attempt  a  task  for  which  many,  if  not  most  of  them,  are 
unfitted  by  either  inclination  or  training.  What  would  be 
the  consequences  to  the  midshipmen  of  pursuing  courses 
in  English,  chemistry,  and  mathematics  under  the  guidance 
of  instructors  who  would  be  every  moment  under  a  strain 
not  to  show  that  they  did  not  know  what  they  were  talking 
about?  That  this  is  not  an  extreme  view  is  evidenced  by 
the  statement  of  a  prominent  officer  of  the  Department, 

183 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

who  finds  advantage  in  the  fact  that,  as  these  officers  might 
be  "rusty"  in  such  subjects,  the  assignment  to  teach  would 
force  them  to  "  brush  up  "  their  knowledge. 

The  profit  of  this  situation  to  the  officer  is,  indeed,  mani- 
fest, but  the  benefit  to  those  fated  to  sit  at  his  feet  is  any- 
thing but  clear.  In  addition  to  this,  there  would  be  fre- 
quent changes  in  the  teaching  staff,  since  officers  would  not 
be  assigned  permanently  to  any  of  these  positions.  Even 
the  argument  of  economy  is  lacking,  since  the  places  of  of- 
ficers detailed  to  give  instruction  at  the  Academy  would 
have  to  be  filled  by  new  appointments.  Taking  into  account 
the  difference  in  pay  between  a  civilian  instructor  and  an 
officer,  the  change  in  contemplation  would  double  the  cost 
of  instruction.  Is  this  the  real  motive  behind  the  proposal 
—  to  get  more  officers  just  as  the  Department  is  always 
moving  heaven  and  earth  to  get  more  battleships?  It  is  to 
be  hoped  that  such  representations  will  be  made  to  Con- 
gress as  will  result  in  the  restoration  to  the  Naval  Appro- 
priation Bill  of  the  item  providing  for  ten  civilian  in- 
structors of  the  junior  grade  now  at  the  Academy,  instead 
of  the  four  to  which  it  is  now  proposed  to  reduce  them.i 

2.  Motor  Trucks  and  Horse-drawn  Vehicles 

One  of  the  chief  advantages  of  the  motor  truck  over  the 
horse  and  wagon  is  in  the  greater  territory  which  it  can 
cover.  A  single  horse  with  a  one-ton  wagon,  for  instance, 
has  a  very  restricted  radius  of  action,  averaging  twent3"-two 
miles  a  day  —  and  to  attain  this,  one-half  the  distance  is 
generally  covered  without  load.  In  other  words,  it  has  a 
productive  mileage  of  eleven  miles  for  a  day's  service.  The 
two-horse,  three-ton  wagon  will  average  twenty  miles  a 
day,  or  a  productive  service  of  ten  loaded  miles.  The  three- 
horse,  five-ton  wagon,  which  is  the  largest  practical  unit 
for  city  service,  is  limited  to  a  working  radius  of  eighteen 

1  Nation,  96:71. 

184 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

miles  a  day,  or  nine  miles  with  load.  It  is  interesting  to 
compare  the  daily  average  mileage  of  power  vehicles  of 
equal  and  larger  load  capacities  with  these  figures.  A 
first-class,  one-ton  power  truck  is  easily  capable  of  traveling 
eighty  miles  a  day.  The  three-ton  truck  can  cover  sixty 
miles  and,  if  well  built,  is  capable  of  repeating  the  perform- 
ance six  days  a  week  without  material  yearly  depreciation. 
A  good  five-ton  truck  will  average  fifty  miles  a  day  while 
a  ten-ton  truck  can  make  thirty-eight  miles. 

While  the  ordinary  horse  and  wagon  is  going  four  miles 
in  an  hour,  the  one-ton  truck  will  cover  eighteen  miles.  It 
can  make  a  delivery  ten  miles  from  the  store  very  nearly 
two  hours  quicker  than  the  wagon.  Where  time  is  money 
in  delivery,  such  a  saving  is  most  important.  Even  a  five- 
ton  truck,  which  is  the  largest  size  needed  in  most  busi- 
nesses, can  go  ten  miles  in  an  hour,  or  about  three  times  as 
fast  as  a  three-horse  wagon's  speed.  Besides  its  greater 
speed,  the  motor  truck  has  the  added  advantage  of  being 
able  to  work  all  day  and  every  day  in  rush  periods  without 
rest.     It  can  run  night  and  day  continuously  when  need  be. 

Moreover,  bad  weather  affects  motor  truck  deliveries 
very  little.  With  the  coming  of  deep  snows  and  glassy 
pavements  the  limitations  of  the  horse  are  forcibly  im- 
pressed on  the  minds  of  every  urban  dweller.  The  efforts  of 
horses  to  stay  on  their  feet  in  drayage  service  in  our  North- 
ern cities,  much  more  to  pull  heavy  loads,  is  so  exhausting 
and  so  laming  that  their  efficiency  is  badly  impaired  and 
the  rehability  of  delivery  of  merchandise  by  animal  power 
is  reduced.  The  power  vehicle,  on  the  other  hand,  has  only 
to  attach  chains  or  some  other  form  of  anti-skidding  appli- 
ance to  the  tires  and  go  on  as  well  as  ever.  The  use  of  the 
power  vehicle  in  winter  does  necessitate,  however,  a  certain 
degree  of  care  by  the  driver  to  obviate  freezing  of  the 
radiator  of  a  water-cooled  gasolene  machine;  but  with  or- 
dinary care  this  disadvantage  of  the  internal  combustion 
motor  is  a  negligible  factor, 

185     . 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

The  thorough  reliabihty  of  the  gasolene  motor  business- 
truck  in  the  winter  season  was  forcibly  demonstrated  in  an 
extraordinary  performance  with  a  three-ton  truck  last  win- 
ter. A  large  motor-cycle  manufacturer  in  Massachusetts 
had  an  important  shipment  for  exhibition  at  a  London 
show  to  forward  to  New  York,  and  it  was  necessary  to  get 
it  on  a  certain  steam.er  or  be  debarred  from  showing  his  prod- 
uct abroad.  The  heavy  snows  had  congested  freight  traffic 
so  badly  that  the  railways  could  not  promise  a  car  in  time 
to  catch  the  steamer.  In  despair  the  motOr-cycle  maker  ap- 
pealed to  a  power-truck  builder  to  get  the  shipment  to  New 
York  within  the  time  Hmit  —  three  days.  Although  the 
roads  were  badly  blockaded  with  snow  and  ice  the  power- 
truck  made  the  journey,  150  miles,  to  New  York  in  less 
than  two  days,  and  the  shipment  went  on  its  way  to  Europe. 

But  to  an  even  greater  degree  does  the  boiling  heat  of 
summer  demonstrate  the  superior  efficiency  of  power  busi- 
ness-vehicles over  horses  in 'the  actual  service  performed. 
When  the  heat  brings  down  the  norm.al  efficiency  of  draft 
horses,  causing  sickness  and  heavy  mortality,  delays  in  de- 
livery and  the  spoiling  of  perishable  products  cost  the  pub- 
lic hundreds  of  thousands  of  dollars.  Much  of  this  loss, 
however,  can  be  avoided,  for  the  power  vehicle  will  give 
just  as  good  service  on  the  hottest  summer  day  as  in  or- 
dinary times  and,  moreover,  will  perform  work  which  no 
animal  team  can  possibly  do.2 

3.  Labor  Unions  and  Industry 

1  would  specify  three  classes  of  benefits  which  unions 
give  to  their  members.  The  first  is  the  immediate,  mate- 
rial benefit  for  which  the  union  is  organized,  namely,  a  fair 
working  day  and  as  high  wages  as  possible.  If  you  find  a 
trade  with  short  hours  and  good  wages,  you  may  be  sure 
that  it  is  one  whose  workers  have  been  organized  into  a 

2  Rollin  W.  Hutchinson,  Jr.,  World's  Work,  23 :268, 

186 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

union.  If  the  hours  are  long  and  the  wages  small,  you  may 
safely  infer  that  the  trade  is  either  unorganized  or  weakly 
organized.  The  only  exceptions  are  a  few  highly  skilled 
trades  where  organization  may  not  be  necessary  to  secure  a 
monopoly  of  labor. 

Further  material  benefits  from  trade  unions  are  found  in 
the  efforts  of  unions  to  secure  the  safety  of  their  mem- 
bers in  the  use  of  dangerous  machines,  in  the  maintenance 
of  good  sanitary  conditions  under  which  the  work  shall  be 
performed,  in  the  granting  of  out-of-work,  sickness,  and 
death  benefits.  A  labor  union  is  also  an  employment  bu- 
reau, and  its  officers  spend  no  little  part  of  their  time  in 
securing  work  for  members  out  of  work. 

The  second  benefit  of  a  trade  union  to  its  members  is  that 
the  union  seeks  to  maintain  permanent  employment.  A 
well-organized  union  is  always  opposed  to  strikes  except 
as  a  last  resort.  The  strength  of  a  union  can  be  judged  by 
the  frequency  of  strikes  in  the  trade.  Labor  leaders,  as 
a  class,  are  opposed  to  strikes  and  prevent  many  labor 
difficulties  of  which  employers  are  not  aware  and  for  which 
the  leaders  receive  no  credit.  This  statement  may  be  a 
surprise  to  some  and  may  be  denied  by  the  enemies  of 
trade  unions,  but  it  is  nevertheless  true.  As  union  officers 
are  not  connected  with  the  shop  in  which  difficulties  arise, 
they  are  usually  free  from  its  prejudices  and  its  irritations. 
There  have  been  many  instances  in  which  they  have  kept 
men  at  work,  where  "  hot-heads "  would  have  caused  a 
strike  and  would  have  involved  their  members  in  loss.  Em- 
ployers who  indignantly  resent  what  they  call  the  in- 
trusion of  outsiders  in  the  management  of  their  own  affairs 
would  do  well  to  consider  this  statement.  This  service  of 
labor  leaders  is  neither  known  nor  appreciated  as  it  de- 
serves to  be.  The  unreasonable  demands  and  overbearing 
manners  of  a  few  are  taken  as  characteristics  of  the  class. 

The  third  benefit  of  a  trade  union  to  its  members  is  the 
moral  benefit.    Unions  in  the  technical  trades  demand  tests 

187 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

of  efficiency  from  their  members.  Some  also  demand  the 
maintenance  of  a  certain  standard  of  technical  efficiency, 
and  many  scrutinize  moral  character.  The  officers  of  a 
union  who  find  a  member  repeatedly  out  of  work  and  con- 
stantly coming  to  them  for  another  job  are  sure  to  advise 
him  to  do  better  work  and  warn  him  against  the  results  of 
dissipation.  Hence,  unionism,  though  not  encouraging 
competition  between  members,  does  encourage  good  char- 
acter and  good  work. 

The  benefits  of  a  trade  union  to  employers  have  been 
recognized  by  a  few,  grudgingly  admitted  by  some,  and 
doubted  by  many.  But  I  am  convinced  that  it  is  as  cer- 
tainly to  the  advantage  of  the  employer  to  deal  with  a 
union,  rather  than  with  unorganized  bodies  of  working 
men,  as  it  is  to  the  advantage  of  the  men  to  belong  to 
unions.  The  first  benefit  to  the  employer  who  wishes  to 
learn  the  real  cause  of  his  difficulties  with  his  men  is  that 
he  can  deal  through  the  union  with  their  own  chosen  rep- 
resentatives, who,  as  a  rule,  are  best  quahfied  to  speak  in 
their  behalf.  Not  being  dependent  upon  the  employer,  the 
leaders  are  able  to  speak  frankly  and  freely,  and  the  root 
of  the  difficulty  can  be  reached  more  quickly  through  them 
than  through  the  workers  who  constantly  fear  that  their 
complaints  may  cause  the  loss  of  their  jobs. 

Secondly,  employers  often  indignantly  declare  that  they 
are  wiUing  to  meet  their  own  men,  but  do  not  admit  the 
right  of  outsiders  to  "interfere"  in  their  business.  With- 
out discussing  the  economic  questions  involved  in  that 
proposition,  but  considering  the  case  merely  from  the  em- 
ployer's point  of  view,  I  believe  the  prejudice  is  short 
sighted.  The  employer  needs  to  learn  the  real  cause  of 
the  difficulty  in  his  shop  from  those  who  are  best  able  to 
express  it  and  who  will  be  free  from  personal  prejudice 
and  local  bias.  The  labor  leader  knows  how  to  handle  his 
own  men,  is  not  deceived  by  their  attempt  to  give  an  in- 
correct statement  of  the  case,  quickly  sifts  the  evidence, 
1 88 


The  Discussion — Brief-Drawing 

and  because  of  his  experience,  is  an  expert  representative 
of  the  laborer's  point  of  view.  If  the  employer  is  willing 
to  meet  his  men  fairly,  he  cannot  find  any  one  so  well 
qualified  to  help  him  settle  the  difficulty  justly  to  both  sides 
as  the  accredited  leader  of  an  organization. 

Thirdly,  the  employer  is  immensely  benefited  by  the  con- 
servatism of  the  experienced  labor  leader.  Unorganized 
bodies  of  men  are  much  more  likely  to  strike  hastily  than 
if  directed  by  experienced  leaders.  Of  course  there  are 
leaders  who  involve  their  unions  in  unnecessary  strikes, 
make  negotiations  with  employers  difficult,  exercise  a  bad 
influence  over  the  men,  and  are  generally  unworthy  of  re- 
spect or  confidence.  But  the  true  character  of  such  men 
is  sure  in  time  to  be  discovered.  A  union  will  not  keep 
a  leader  who  does  not  "  hit  it  off "  with  the  employers. 
My  opinion  is  that  while  some  unworthy  and  dishonest 
leaders  are  unwisely  trusted  by  their  organizations,  in  the 
majority  of  cases  it  would  be  better  for  the  men  if  they 
more  thoroughly  trusted  their  own  chosen  leaders.  Dis- 
trust of  their  leaders  is  the  greatest  weakness  of  labor 
unions.  While  a  few  so-called  "  walking  delegates  "  may 
be  untrustworthy,  the  majority  of  them  are  reliable  and 
hard  working,  having  less  leisure  than  the  men  whom  they 
represent.  The  labor  leader  who  works  sixteen  hours  a 
day  to  secure  an  eight-hour  day  for  his  men  is  not  con- 
sistent with  his  principles,  but  he  is  entitled  to  the  respect 
of  his  organization. 


189 


CHAPTER  VIII 
METHODS  OF  REFUTATION 

A  COMPLETE  argument  consists  of  two  kinds  of 
proof:  constructive  proof  and  refutation.  Con- 
structive proof  is  that  part  of  an  argument  which 
sets  forth  direct  reasons  for  belief  in  a  certain  prop- 
osition; refutation  is  that  part  which  destroys  the 
reasons  for  beHef  in  the  opposite  side. 

In  general,  each  of  these  divisions  is  of  about 
equal  importance,  at  times  the  value  of  one  pre- 
dominating and  at  times  the  value  of  the  other.-  If 
one  is  addressing  an  audience  unacquainted  with 
his  views  or  hostile  towards  them,  he  is  not  likely 
to  make  much  progress  in  getting  his  own  beliefs 
accepted  until  he  has,  at  least  in  part,  shattered  the 
opinion  already  existing.  If,  however,  the  audi- 
ence is  predisposed  or  even  willing  to  accept  the 
doctrine  advocated,  very  little  but  constructive 
proof  may  be  necessary. 

In  debate,  the  side  that  has  the  burden  of  proof 
will  usually  have  more  use  for  constructive  argu- 
190 


Methods  of  Refutation 

ment,  and  the  opposite  side  will  have  more  use  for 
refutation.  This  statement  will  not  always  hold 
true,  however,  for  the  rule  will  vary  under  differ- 
ent circumstances;  a  debater  must,  therefore,  hold 
himself  in  readiness  to  meet  whatever  contingencies 
arise.  Debate  may  be  likened  to  the  play  of  two 
boys  building  houses  with  blocks;  each  boy  builds 
the  best  house  he  can,  and  at  times  attempts  to 
overthrow  the  work  of  his  playmate.  The  one  that 
has  the  better  structure  when  the  game  ends  comes 
off  victorious.  Thus  it  is  in  debate;  each  debater 
must  do  his  best  both  to  build  up  his  own  argument 
and  to  destroy  his  opponent's. 

To  handle  refutation  successfully,  either  in 
written  argument  or  in  debate,  one  must  know  what 
to  refute  and  what  to  leave  alone.  The  general 
rule  governing  this  matter  is:  Refute  only  those 
arguments  which  are  essential  to  the  proof  of  the 
other  side.  All  trivial  ideas,  even  all  misstatements 
which  if  refuted  would  not  destroy  any  fundamen- 
tal process  of  an  opponent's  proof,  should  pass  un- 
noticed. To  mention  them  means  waste  of  time 
and  eft'ort.  It  is  not  uncommon  for  a  debater  to 
make  trivial  errors  intentionally,  in  the  hope  that 
his  opponent  will  consume  valuable  time  in  refuting 
them  and  thus  allow  his  main  argument  to  go  un- 
191 


Methods  of  Refutation 

scathed.  When  this  stratagem  succeeds,  the  one 
who  made  the  mistakes  can  acknowledge  that  he 
was  wrong  in  those  unimportant  details,  and  yet 
show*  that  his  fundamental  arguments  have  not  been 
overthrown.  While  arguing  on  a  political  question, 
an  intercollegiate  debater  once  laid  considerable 
stress  on  an  opinion  expressed  by  Arthur  T.  Hadley, 
"  President,"  as  he  stated,  "  of  Harvard  Univer- 
sity." His  opponent,  of  course,  might  have  held 
this  statement  up  to  ridicule,  but  such  an  exposure 
would  have  been  impolitic,  in  that  it  would  have 
in  no  wise  impaired  the  value  of  Mr.  Hadley's 
opinion  as  evidence.  Another  debater,  not  so  wise, 
once  spent  considerable  time  in  correcting  an  op- 
ponent who  had  said  that  the  Steel  Trust  was 
formed  in  1891  instead  of  in  1901,  as  was  the  case. 
As  these  dates  had  no  vital  bearing  on  the  question 
at  issue,  the  error  should  have  been  allowed  to  pass. 
The  temptation  to  point  out  the  flaws  that  are  most 
obvious  is  always  great,  but  unless  by  so  doing  one 
can  knock  out  the  props  on  which  an  opponent's 
proof  rests,  such  an  attack  accomplishes  nothing. 

Another  common  error  in  refutation  consists  in 
"  answering  one's  self."  A  person  is  guilty  of  this 
•fault  whenever  he  misstates  an  opponent's  argu- 
ment, either  because  he  does  not  understand  it  or 

192 


Methods  of  Refutation 

through  design,  and  then  refutes  this  misstatement. 
The  folly  of  such  procedure  is  made  apparent  by 
merely  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  the  original 
argument  has  been  garbled  but  in  no  wise  refuted. 
An  opponent  can  convict  the  one  who  has  "  an- 
swered himself  "  either  of  unpardonable  ignorance 
about  the  subject  or  of  downright  dishonesty. 

To  guard  against  these  errors  of  refuting  un- 
important details  and  of  ''  answering  one's  self," 
it  is  always  well  to  reduce  an  opponent's  argument 
to  the  form  of  a  brief.  If  the  argument  is  in  print, 
this  task  is  comparatively  simple;  if  the  argument 
is  oral,  the  task  will  be  harder  but  will  still  present 
no  serious  difficulties  to  one  who  is  used  to  draw- 
ing briefs.  When  all  the  ideas  have  been  arranged 
in  the  form  of  headings  and  subheadings,  and  the 
relation  between  the  ideas  has  been  indicated  by 
means  of  numbers  and  letters,  then  the  arguer  can 
quickly  decide  what  points  he  ought  to  refute  and 
what  ones  he  can  refute. 

It  goes  without  saying  that  the  headings  marked 
with  the  Roman  numerals  contain  the  most  impor- 
tant ideas,  and  should,  therefore,  be  overthrown  as 
far  as  possible.  There  are  three  ways  of  dispos- 
ing of  them:  one  way  is  to  state  that  the  headings 
are  false  and  then  bring  on  new  proof  to  show 
193 


Methods  of  Refutation 

their  falsity;  the  second  way  is  to  call  attention  to 
the  subheadings  with  which  the  opponent  has  bol- 
stered up  the  main  headings,  and  then,  by  proving 
these  subheads  false,  allow  the  main  heads  to  fall 
to  the  ground;  the  third  way  is  to  admit  that  the 
subheads  are  true  and  then  show  that  the  infer- 
ences drawn  from  them  are  unwarranted. 

To  illustrate:  A  part  of  an  argument  on  the 
affirmative  side  of  the  proposition,  "'  Resolved,  That 
students  in  American  colleges  should  be  excused 
from  final  examinations  in  all  subjects  in  which 
they  have  attained  a  daily  grade  of  at  least  eighty- 
five  per  cent.,"  might  be  reduced  to  the  following 
brief  form: 

I.    This  rule  would  be  of  great  intellectual  benefit 
to  college  students,  for 
A.     They  would  master  their  work  more  thor- 
oughly, because 
I.     They  would  study  harder  during  the 
term. 
The  first  method  of  overthrowing  the  heading  in- 
dicated by  (I)  would  be  to  attack  it  directly.    This 
attack  might  consist  of  opinions  of  prominent  edu- 
cators who,  on  theoretical  grounds,  do  not  believe 
an  intellectual  benefit  would  result  from  the  adop- 
tion of  such  a  rule;  of  the  opinions  of  educators 

194 


Methods  of  Refutation 

who  have  tried  the  rule  and  declare  that  it  is  an 
intellectual  detriment;  and  of  a  course  of  reason- 
ing which  would  show  that  this  system  would  rob 
the  students  exempted  of  the  great  intellectual  bene- 
fit that  is  derived  from  the  preparation  for  an  ex- 
amination and  from  the  taking  of  an  examination. 

The  second  method  would  be  to  show  that  (i) 
is  not  true;  therefore  (A)  would  be  false,  and  (I) 
would  be  left  entirely  unsupported. 

Under  the  third  method  the  arguer  would  admit 
the  truth  of  (i),  but  would  deny  that  the  truth  of 
(A)  is  established  by  it;  therefore  (I)  v/ould  be 
unsupported. 

Whenever  a  subheading  is  attacked,  it  is  always 
very  essential  to  show  that  the  attack  is  made  sim- 
ply because  this  subheading  serves  as  a  foundation 
for  the  main  heading.  In  this  particular  argument, 
refutation  according  to  the  second  and  third  meth- 
ods might  read  as  follows :  "  The  contention  of 
the  affirmative  that  the  eighty-five  per  cent,  rule 
should  be  adopted  because  it  would  result  in  an  in- 
tellectual improvement  among  college  students, 
rests  on  the  supposition  that  students  would  study 
harder  during  the  term,  and  for  that  reason  would 
more  thoroughly  master  their  subjects.  This  rea- 
soning is  erroneous  because,  in  the  first  place,  as 
195 


Methods  of  Refutation 

I  will  show,  but  very  few  students,  if  any,  would 
study  harder  during  the  term ;  and,  in  the  second 
place,  even  if  they  did,  those  exempted  would  not 
have  mastered  their  work  so  completely  at  the  end 
of  the  year  as  they  would  have  if  they  had  taken 
an  examination." 

From  the  preceding,  it  is  apparent  that  refutation 
consists  of  discrediting  evidence  and  attacking  rea- 
soning. The  ways  to  overthrow  evidence  will  be 
considered  first. 

EVIDENCE 

It  is  taken  for  granted  that  the  evidence  mus- 
tered by  the  opponent  is  sufficient,  if  not  over- 
thrown, to  establish  his  side  of  the  discussion.  Of 
course,  if  enough  evidence  for  this  purpose  is  lack- 
ing, one  has  only  to  call  attention  to  this  funda- 
mental weakness  in  order  to  overthrow  the  argu- 
ment then  and  there.  The  rules,  therefore,  for 
testing  evidence  assume  that  the  opponent  has 
cited  facts  that,  if  not  combated,  will  establish  his 
case. 

These  tests  are  the  same  as  those  given  in  Chap- 
ter VI;  a  hasty  review  of  them,  however,  may  be 
serviceable  at  this  point. 

196 


Methods  of  Refutation 

I.     Tests  of  the  sources  of  evidence. 

A.  Is  the  witness  competent  to  give  a  trust- 

worthy account  of  the  matter? 

B.  Is  the  witness  wilUng  to  give  an  accurate 

account  ? 
I.     Does  he  have  any  personal  interest  in 
the  case? 

C.  Is  the  witness  prejudiced? 

D.  Does  the  witness  have  a  good  reputation 

for  honesty  and  accuracy? 
11.     Internal  tests  of  evidence. 

A.  Is  the  evidence  consistent   (a)   with  it- 

self,  (b)   with  known  facts,   (c)   with 
human  experience? 

B.  Is  it  first-hand  evidence? 

C.  Can  the  evidence  be  classed  as  especially 

valuable  ? 

1.  Does    it    consist    of    hurtful    admis- 

sions ? 

2.  Is  it  negative  evidence? 
IIL     Test  of  argument  from  authority. 

A.     Is  the  witness  an  acknowledged  author- 
ity on  the  subject  about  which  he  tes- 
tifies ? 
To  overthrow  or  weaken  argument  from  author- 
ity, one  may  either  discredit  its  source  or  bring  to 
197 


Methods  of  Refutation 

light  some  inconsistency  in  the  statement  itself. 
Usually  the  former  method  alone  is  possible.  To 
accomplish  this  result,  one  may  show  that  the  wit- 
ness spoke  from  insufficient  knowledge  of  the  mat- 
ter, or  was  prejudiced,  or  had  some  personal  in- 
terest in  the  case.  Counter  authority  will  also  be 
of  assistance.  The  following  quotation  taken  from 
a  college  debate  furnishes  the  student  a  good  ex- 
ample of  how  to  handle  this  sort  of  refutation : 

We  have  heard  many  statements  to  the  effect  that  the 
amount  of  unemployment  throughout  the  country  is  ab- 
normal. Oiicago  especially  is  cited  as  an  example.  But 
who  are  the  authorities  for  this  information?  Two  news- 
papers, whose  political  affiliations  are  such  that  it  would 
be  for  their  interest  to  make  it  appear  that  the  country  is 
in  a  state  of  great  industrial  depression;  and  one  amateur 
investigator,  Chauncey  Beaulieu,  whose  sole  claim  to  rec- 
ognition seems  to  be  scattering  magazine  articles  of  the 
popular^  sensational  type.  On  the  other  hand,  no  less  a 
person  than  Professor  Charles  R.  Henderson,  Secretary 
of  the  Chicago  Commission  on  Unemployment,  stated  that 
as  a  result  of  the  study  of  that  commission,  it  was  his  be- 
lief that  in  Chicago  the  amount  of  unemployment  was  not 
unusual. 

REASONING 

L     Induction. 

A.     Have  enough  instances  of  the  class  under 
consideration  been  investigated  to  es- 
198 


Methods  of  Refutation 

tablish  the  probable  existence  of  a  gen- 
eral law? 
B.     Have  enough  instances  been  investigated 
to  establish  absolutely  the  existence  of 
a  general  law? 
II.     Deduction. 

A.  Are  both  premises  true? 

B.  Is  the  fact  stated  in  the  minor  premise 

an   instance   of   the   general   law   ex- 
pressed in  the  major  premise? 

III.  Antecedent  probabihty. 

A.  Is  the  cause  of  sufficient  strength  to  pro- 

duce the  alleged  effect? 

B.  May    something   intervene   and   prevent 

the  action  of  the  cause? 

IV.  Sign, 

A.  Argument  from  effect  to  cause. 

1.  Is  the  alleged  cause  adequate  to  pro- 

duce the  observed  effect? 

2.  Could  the  observed  effect  have  re- 

sulted from  any  other  cause  than 
the  one  assigned? 

B.  Argum.ent  from  effect  to  effect. 

I.     Do  the  combined  tests  of  argument 
from   effect   to   cause   and    from 
cause  to  effect  hold? 
199 


Methods  of  Refutation 

V.     Example. 

A.  Is  there  any  fundamental  difference  be- 
tween the  case  in  hand  and  the  case 
cited  as  an  example  ? 


FALLACIES 

A  fallacy  is  an  error  in  reasoning.  The  preced- 
ing part  of  this  chapter  has  already  suggested  tests 
that  will  expose  many  such  faults,  but  there  are  a 
few  errors  which,  because  of  their  frequency  or 
their  inadaptability  to  other  classification,  demand 
separate  treatment.  This  book  follows  the  plan  of 
most  other  texts  on  argumentation,  and  treats  these 
errors  under  a  separate  head  marked  fallacies.  To 
detect  a  fallacy  in  another's  argument  is  to  weaken, 
if  not  to  destroy,  his  case;  to  avoid  making  a  fal- 
lacy in  one's  own  argument  means  escape  from  hu- 
miliation and  defeat.  Hence,  a  knowledge  of  fal- 
lacies is  one  of  the  most  essential  parts  of  a  de- 
bater's equipment. 

The  classification  given  here  does  not  pretend  to 
be  exhaustive;  it  does,  however,  consider  the  most 
common  and  insidious  breaches  of  reasoning  that 
are  likely  to  occur,  and  the  following  pages  should 
be  studied  with  great  care. 

200 


Methods  of  Refutation 

I.     Begging  the  Question  (Petitio  Principii) 

I.  Mere  assumption.  Begging  the  question 
means  assuming  the  truth  of  that  which  needs 
proof.  This  fallacy  is  found  in  its  simplest  form 
in  epithets  and  appellations.  The  lawyer  who 
speaks  of  "  the  criminal  on  trial  for  his  Hf e  "  begs 
the  question  in  that  he  assumes  the  prisoner  to  be 
a  criminal  before  the  court  has  rendered  a  verdict. 
Those  writers  who  have  recently  discussed  "  the 
brutal  game  of  football "  without  having  first  ad- 
duced a  particle  of  proof  to  show  that  the  game  is 
brutal,  fall  into  the  same  error.  An  unpardonable 
instance  of  question-begging  lies  in  the  following 
introduction,  once  given  by  a  debater  who  was  at- 
tacking the  proposition,  '^Resolved,  That  the  Fed- 
eral government  should  acquire  and  operate  the  rail- 
roads in  the  United  States  " : 

We  of  the  negative  will  show  that  the  efficient  and  highly 
beneficial  system  of  private  ownership  should  be  main- 
tained, and  that  the  irnpracticable  system  of  government 
ownership  can  never  succeed  in  the  United  States  or  in 
any  similarly  governed  coimtry. 

Private  ownership  and  government  ownership 
may  possess  these  qualities  attributed  to  them,  but 
the  debater  has  no  right  to  make  such  an  assump- 
tion ;  he  must  prove  that  they  have  these  qualities. 

201 


Methods  of  Refutation 

2.  Assumption  used  as  proof.  Such  barefaced 
assumptions  as  the  preceding  usually  do  little  dam- 
age except  to  the  one  vv  ho  makes  them.  They  are 
not  likely  to  lead  astray  an  audience  of  average  in- 
telligence; on  the  other  hand,  they  do  stamp  the 
arguer  as  prejudiced  and  illogical.  But  when  as- 
sumptions are  used  as  proof,  hidden  in  the  midst 
of  quantities  of  other  material,  they  may  produce 
an  unwarranted  effect  upon  one  who  is  not  a  clear 
thinker,  or  who  is  off  his  guard.  If,  without  show- 
ing that  football  is  brutal,  one  calls  it  an  extremely 
brutal  game,  and  then  urges  its  abolishment  on  the 
ground  of  its  brutality,  he  has  used  an  assumption 
as  proof,  and  has,  therefore,  begged  the  question. 
The  debater  who  stated,  without  proving,  that  vast 
numbers  of  unskilled  laborers  were  needed  in  the 
United  States,  and  then  urged  this  as  a  reason  why 
no  educational  test  should  be  applied  to  immigrants 
coming  to  this  country,  furnished  an  example  of  the 
same  fallacy. 

3.  Unv^arranted  assumption  of  the  truth  of  a 
suppressed  premise.  The  student  is  already  fa- 
miliar with  the  enthymeme.  The  enthymeme  con- 
stitutes a  valid  form  of  reasoning  only  when  the 
suppressed  premise  is  recognized  as  true.  There- 
fore, whenever  an  arguer  makes  use  of  the  enthy- 

202 


Methods  of  Refutation 

meme  without  attempting  to  establish  a  suppressed 
premise  whose  truth  is  not  admitted,  he  has  argued 
fallaciously.  This  is  a  third  method  of  begging 
the  question.  To  illustrate:  In  advocating  the 
abolishment  of  football  from  the  list  of  college  ath- 
letic sports,  one  might  reason,  "  Football  should  be 
abolished  because  it  obviously  exposes  a  player  to 
possible  injury."  The  suppressed  premise  in  this 
case  would  be:  All  sports  which  expose  a  player 
to  possible  injury  should  be  abolished.  Failure  to 
prove  the  truth  of  this  unadmitted  statement  con- 
stitutes the  fallacy. 

4.  Assumption  equivalent  to  the  proposition  to 
be  proved.  It  is  not  surprising  that  a  man  car- 
ried away  with  excitement  or  prejudice  should 
make  assumptions  that  he  does  not  even  try  to  sub- 
stantiate, but  that  any  one  should  assume  the  truth 
of  the  very  conclusion  that  he  has  set  out  to  es- 
tablish seems  incredible.  Such  a  form  of  begging 
the  question,  however,  does  frequently  occur. 
Sometimes  the  fallacy  is  so  hidden  in  a  mass  of  il- 
lustration and  rhetorical  embellishment  that  at  first 
it  is  not  apparent;  but  stripped  of  its  verbal  finery, 
it  stands  out  very  plainly.  The  following  passage 
written  on  the  affirmative  side  of  the  proposition, 
''  Resolved,  That  the  college  course  should  be  short- 
203 


Methods  of  Refutation 

ened  to  three  years,"  will  serve  as  a  particularly 
flagrant  illustration: 

It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  in  the  world  of  to-day  time 
is  an  essential  factor  in  the  race  for  success.  No  young 
man  can  afford  to  dawdle  for  four  long  years  in  acquiring 
a  so-called  "  higher "  education.  Three-fourths  of  that 
time  is,  if  anything,  more  than  sufficient  in  which  to  attain 
all  the  graces  and  culture  that  the  progressive  man  needs. 

It  is  evident  that  the  "  argument "  in  this  case 
consists  of  nothing  more  than  a  repetition  of  the 
proposition. 

5.  Arguing  in  a  circle.  Another  phase  of  beg- 
ging the  question  consists  of  using  an  assumption 
as  proof  of  a  proposition  and  of  then  quoting  the 
proposition  as  proof  of  the  assumption.  Two  as- 
sertions are  made,  neither  of  which  is  substanti- 
ated by  any  real  proof,  but  each  of  which  is  used 
to  prove  the  other.  This  fallacy  probably  occurs 
most  frequently  in  conversation.  Consider  the  fol- 
lowing : 

A.  "  Government  by  commission  is  the  best 
form  of  city  government." 

B.  "  What  makes  you  think  so  ?  " 

A.  "  Because  it  has  been  adopted  by  our  most 
progressive  cities  —  Des  IMoines,  Galveston,  Cedar 
Rapids." 

204 


Methods  of  Refutation 

B.  "  Why  do  you  call  them  our  most  progres- 
sive cities  ?  " 

A.  "  Because  they  have  adopted  the  best  fonn 
of  city  government." 

This  fallacy  occurs  when  one  proves  the  author- 
ity of  the  church  from  the  testimony  of  the  scrip- 
tures, and  then  establishes  the  authenticity  of  the 
scriptures  by  the  testimony  of  the  church.  A  sim- 
ilar fallacy  has  been  pointed  out  in  the  works  of 
Plato.  In  Phoodo,  he  demonstrates  the  immortal- 
ity of  the  soul  from  its  simplicity,  and  in  the  Re- 
public, he  demonstrates  the  simplicity  of  the  soul 
from  its  immortality.  The  following  fragment  of 
a  brief  argues  in  a  circle: 

I.     This  principle  is  in  accordance  with  the  princi- 
ples of  the  Democratic  party,  since 
A.     The  leader  of  the  Democratic  party  be- 
lieves in  it,  for 
I.     As  the  leader  of  the  party,  he  natu- 
rally believes  in  Democratic  princi- 
ples. 

II.    Ambiguous  Terms   (Equivocation;  Con- 
fusion of  Terms) 

The  fallacy  of  ambiguous  terms  consists  of  using 
the  same  term  in  tv/o  distinct  senses  in  the  same 
205 


Methods  of  Refutation 

argument.  Thus  if  one  were  to  argue  that  "  no 
Sv,.^^^ designing  person  ought  to  be  trusted;  engravers 
are  by  profession  designers;  therefore  they  ought 
not  to  be  trusted,"  it  is  quite  apparent  that  the 
term  "  design  "  means  totally  different  things  in  the 
two  premises.     The  same  fallacy  occurs  in  the  ar- 

Tgument,  "  Since  the  American  people  believe  in  a 
republican  form  of  government,  they  should  vote 
the  Republican  ticket."     Again: 

"  Interference  with  another  man's  business  is  il- 
legal ; 

"  Underselling    interferes    with    another    man's 
business ; 

"  Therefore  underselling  is  illegal." 
J.  S.  Mill  in  his  System  of  Logic  discusses  the 
fallacy  of  ambiguous  terms  with  great  care.     In 
part  he  says : 

The  mercantile  public  are  frequently  led  into  this  fal- 
lacy by  the  phrase  "  scarcity  of  money."  In  the  language 
of  commerce,  "money"  has  two  meanings:  currency,  or 
the  circulating  medium;  and  capital  seeking  investment, 
especially  investment  on  loan.  In  this  last  sense,  the  word 
is  used  when  the  "  money  market "  is  spoken  of,  and  when 
the  "value  of  money"  is  said  to  be  high  or  low,  the  rate 
of  interest  being  meant.  The  consequence  of  this  am- 
biguity is,  that  as  soon  as  scarcity  of  money  in  the  latter  of 
these  senses  begins  to  be  felt, —  as  soon  as  there  is  difficult^' 
of  obtaining  loans,  and  the  rate  of  interest  is  high, —  it  is 
concluded  that  this  must  arise  from  causes  acting  upon  the 
206 


Methods  of  Refutation 

quantity  of  money  in  the  other  and  more  popular  sense; 
that  the  circulating  medium  must  have  diminished  in  quan- 
tity, or  ought  to  be  increased.  I  am  aware  that,  inde- 
pendently of  the  double  meaning  of  the  term,  there  are  in 
the  facts  themselves  some  peculiarities,  giving  an  apparent 
support  to  this  error;  but  the  ambiguity  of  the  language 
stands  on  the  very  threshold  of  the  subject,  and  intercepts 
all  attempts  to  throw  light  upon  it. 

As  countless  words  and  expressions  have  several 
meanings,  there  is  almost  no  limit  to  the  confusion 
which  this  fallacy  can  cause.  Some  of  the  most 
common  terms  that  are  used  ambiguously  are 
right,  liberty,  law,  representative,  theory,  church, 
state,  student. 

By  carefully  defining  all  terms  that  have  more 
than  one  meaning  and  by  insisting  on  a  rigid  ad- 
herence to  the  one  meaning  wherever  the  term  is 
used,  a  debater  can  easily  avoid  fallacies  of  this 
sort  in  his  own  argument  and  expose  those  of  his 
opponent. 


III.     False  Cause 

The  fallacy  of  false  cause  occurs  whenever  that 
which  could  in  no  way  bring  about  the  effect  that  is 
being  established  is  urged  as  its  cause.  This  fal- 
lacy in  its  most  obvious  form  is  found  only  in  the 
arguments  of  careless  and  illogical  thinkers.  Some 
207 


I 


Methods  of  Refutation 

college  students  occasionally  draw  briefs  that  con- 
tain such  reasoning  as  the  following: 

I.    The  Midland  Railroad  first  mortgage  bonds  are  an 
unsound  investment,  because 
A.    The  Interstate  Commerce  Commission  has  pre- 
scribed a  uniform  method  of  accounting  for 
all  railroads  in  the  United  States. 

A  member  of  an  intercollegiate  debating  team 
once  argued  thus : 

I.    The  adoption  of  woman  suffrage  in  the  United  States 
will  work  political  harm,  for 
A.     Many  women  will  not  go  to  the  polls. 

The  error  of  such  plainly  absurd  reasoning  as 
occurs  in  the  preceding  illustrations  needs  no  ex- 
planation. There  is  one  form  of  the  fallacy  of 
false  cause,  however,  that  is  much  more  common 
and  insidious  and  therefore  deser^'es  special  treat- 
ment. 

Post  hoc  ergo  propter  hoc.  (After  this,  there- 
fore, on  account  of  this.)  This  phase  of  the  fal- 
lacy consists  of  the  assumption  that  since  cause  pre- 
cedes effect  what  has  preceded  an  event  has  caused 
it.  The  most  frequent  occurrence  of  the  error  is 
to  be  found  in  superstitions.  If  some  one  meets 
with  an  accident  while  taking  a  journey  that  began 
on  Friday,  many  people  will  argue  that  the  accident 
208 


Methods  of  Refutation 

is  the  effect  of  the  unlucky  day.  Some  farmers  be- 
lieve their  crops  will  not  prosper  unless  the  planting 
is  done  when  the  moon  is  in  a  certain  quarter; 
sailors  often  refuse  to  embark  in  a  renamed  ves- 
sel. Because  in  the  past,  one  event  has  been 
known  to  follow  another,  it  is  argued  that  the  first 
event  was  the  cause  of  the  second,  and  that  the  sec- 
ond event  will  invariably  follow  the  first. 

But  this  fallacy  does  not  find  its  only  expression 
in  superstitions.  To  post  hoc  reasoning  is  due 
much  of  the  popularity  of  patent  medicines.  Po- 
litical beliefs,  even,  are  often  generated  in  the  same 
way;  prosperity  follows  the  passing  of  a  certain 
law,  and  people  jump  to  the  conclusion  that  this  one 
law  has  caused  the  "  good  times."  Some  dema- 
gogues go  so  far  as  to  say  that  education  among 
the  Indians  is  responsible  for  the  increased  death 
rate  of  many  of  the  tribes. 

A  slightly  different  phase  of  the  post  hoc  fal- 
lacy consists  in  attributing  the  existence  of  a  cer- 
tain condition  to  a  single  preceding  event,  when  at 
the  most  this  event  could  have  been  only  a  partial 
cause  of  what  followed,  and  may  not  have  been  a 
cause  at  all.  A  medicine  that  could  not  have  ef- 
fected a  cure  may  have  been  of  some  slight  benefit. 
A  law  that  could  not  possibly  have  been  the  sole 
209 


Methods  of  Refutation 

cause  of  "  good  times  "  may  have  had  a  beneficial 
effect.  To  avoid  this  fallacy,  one  must  be  sure 
not  only  that  the  assigned  cause  is  operative,  but 
that  it  is  also  adequate. 

In  the  following  passage.  Harpers  Weekly  points 
out  the  error  in  the  reasoning  made  by  several  col- 
lege presidents  who,  after  compiling  statistics, 
stated  that  a  college  education  increased  a  man's 
chance  of  success  from  one  in  ten  thousand  to  one 
in  forty: 

Not  many  persons  doubt  any  longer  that  an  American 
college  education  is  an  advantage  to  most  youths  who  can 
get  it,  but  in  these  attempts  to  estimate  statistically  what 
college  education  does  for  men  there  is  a  good  deal  of  con- 
fusion of  post  hoc  and  propter  hoc.  Define  success  as  you 
will,  a  much  larger  proportion  of  American  college  men 
win  it  than  of  men  who  don't  go  to  college,  but  how  much 
college  training  does  for  those  successful  men  is  still  de- 
batable. Remember  that  they  are  a  picked  lot,  the  likeliest 
children  of  parents  whose  ability  or  desire  to  send  their 
children  to  college  is  evidence  of  better  fortune,  or  at  least 
of  higher  aspirations  than  the  average.  And  because  their 
iparents  are,  as  a  rule,  more  or  less  prosperous  and  v/ell 
educated,  they  get  and  would  get,  whether  they  went  to 
college  or  not,  a  better  than  average  start  in  life.  .  .  . 

If  one  boy  out  of  a  family  of  four  goes  to  college,  it  is 
the  clever  one.  The  boys  who  might  go  to  college  and 
don't  are  commonly  the  lazy  ones  who  won't  study.  The 
colleges  get  nowadays  a  large  proportion  of  the  best  boys 
of  the  strongest  families.  The  best  boys  of  the  strongest 
families  would  wnn  far  more  than  their  proportionate 
share  of  success  even  if  there  were  no  colleges. 
210 


Methods  of  Refutation 

An  exposure  of  similarly  fallacious  reasoning  is 
made  by  Edward  M.  Shepard  in  the  Atlantic 
Monthly: 

The  Republican  argument  is  that  the  whole  edifice  of 
our  prosperity  depends  upon  high  protective  or  prohibitive 
duties,  and  that  to  them  is  due  our  industrial  progress.  Is 
it  not,  indeed,  a  disparagement  of  the  self-depending  facul- 
ties of  the  American  people  thus  to  affirm  that,  in  spite  of 
their  marvelous  advantages,  they  would  have  failed  in 
industrial  Hfe  unless  by  force  of  law  they  could  have  pre- 
vented the  competition  with  them  of  other  peoples?  It 
is  only  by  the  sophistry  to  which  I  have  referred  that  this 
disparagement  is  justified.  It  is  that  old  argument  of 
veritable  folly  that,  because  event  Z  follows  event  W,  as 
it  follows  events  A  and  B  and  many  besides,  therefore 
W  is  the  sole  cause  of  Z. 

From  what  has  been  said  it  is  obvious  that  it  is 
never  safe  to  account  for  an  occurrence  or  a  con- 
dition by  merely  referring  to  something  that  ac- 
companies it  or  precedes  it.  There  must  be  a  con- 
nection between  the  alleged  cause  and  the  effect, 
and  this  connection  must  be  causal ;  otherwise,  both 
may  be  the  result  of  the  same  cause.  The  cause 
must  also  be  adequate;  and  it  must,  moreover,  be 
evident  that  the  result  has  not  been  produced, 
wholly  or  partially,  by  some  other  cause  or  causes. 


211 


Methods  of  Refutation 

IV.     Composition  and  Division 

Composition.  The  fallacy  of  composition  con- 
sists of  attributing  to  a  whole  that  which  has  been 
proved  only  of  a  part.  To  condemn  or  to  approve 
of  a  fraternity  because  of  the  conduct  of  only  a 
few  of  its  members,  to  say  that  what  is  advanta- 
geous for  certain  states  in  the  Union  would  there- 
fore be  beneficial  for  the  United  States  as  a  whole, 
to  reason  from  the  existence  of  a  few  millionaires 
that  the  English  nation  is  wealthy,  would  be  to  fall 
into  this  fallacy.  Furthermore,  it  is  fallacious  to 
think  that  because  something  is  true  of  each  mem- 
ber of  a  class  taken  distrihntively,  the  same  thing 
holds  true  of  the  class  taken  collectively.  It  is  not 
logical  to  argue  that  because  each  member  of  a 
jury  is  very  likely  to  judge  erroneously,  the  jury 
as  a  whole  is  also  very  likely  to  judge  erroneously. 
Because  each  witness  to  an  event  is  liable  to  give 
false  or  incorrect  evidence,  it  is  unreasonable  to 
think  that  no  confidence  can  be  placed  in  the  con- 
current testimony  of  a  number  of  witnesses. 

Division.  The  fallacy  of  division  is  the  con- 
verse of  the  fallacy  of  composition.  It  consists  of 
attributing  to  a  part  that  which  has  been  proved 
t»f  the  whole.     For  instance,  Lancaster  county  is 

212 


Methods  of  Refutation 

the  most  fertile  county  In  Pennsylvania,  but  that 
fact  by  itself  does  not  warrant  the  statement  that 
any  one  particular  farm  is  exceptionally  fertile. 
Because  the  people  of  a  country  are  suffering  from 
famine,  it  does  not  follow  that  one  particular  per- 
son is  thus  afflicted.  Again,  it  would  be  fallacious 
to  say :  It  is  admitted  that  the  judges  of  the  court 
of  appeal  cannot  misinterpret  the  law;  Richard 
Rowe  is  a  judge  of  the  court  of  appeal;  therefore 
he  cannot  misinterpret  the  law. 

V.     Ignoring  the  Question  (Ignoratio  Elenchi) 

An  arguer  is  said  to  ignore  the  question,  or  to 
argue  beside  the  point,  whenever  he  attempts  to 
prove  or  disprove  anything  except  the  proposition 
under  discussion.  This  fallacy  may  arise  through 
carelessness  or  trickery.  An  unskilled  debater  will 
often  unconsciously  wander  away  from  his  sub- 
ject; and  an  unscrupulous  debater,  when  unable 
to  defend  his  position,  will  sometimes  cunningly 
shift  his  ground  and  argue  upon  a  totally  new 
proposition,  which  is,  however,  so  similar  to  the 
original  one  that  in  the  heat  of  controversy  the 
change  Is  hardly  noticeable.  A  discussion  on  the 
subject,  "  The  boycott  is  a  legitimate  means  of  se- 
curing   concessions    from    employers,''    which    at- 


Methods  of  Refutation 

tempted  to  show  the  effectiveness  of  the  boycott, 
would  ignore  the  question.  Likewise,  in  a  discus- 
sion on  the  proposition,  "  The  average  college  stu- 
dent could  do  in  three  years  the  work  now  done  in 
four,"  any  proof  showing  the  desirability  of  such 
a  crowding  together  of  college  work  would  be  he- 
side  the  point. 

In  the  following  passage  Macaulay  holds  up  to 
scorn  certain  arguments  which  contain  this  fallacy : 

The  advocates  of  Charles,  like  the  advocates  of  other 
malefactors  against  whom  overwhelming  evidence  is  pro- 
duced, generally  decline  all  controversy  about  facts,  and 
content  themselves  with  calling  testimony  to  character. 

We  charge  him  with  having  broken  his  coronation  oath ; 
and  we  are  told  that  he  kept  his  marriage  vow!  V/e  ac- 
cuse him  of  having  given  up  his  people  to  the  merciless  in- 
flictions of  the  most  hot-headed  and  hard-hearted  of  pre- 
lates; and  the  defence  is,  that  he  took  his  little  son  on  his 
knees  and  kissed  him!  We  censure  him  for  having  vio- 
lated the  articles  of  the  Petition  of  Rights,  after  having, 
for  good  and  valuable  consideration,  promised  to  obey 
them;  and  we  are  informed  that  he  was  accustomed  to 
hear  prayers  at  six  o'clock  in  the  morning! 

Whenever  an  arguer  avoids  the  question  at  issue 
and  makes  an  attack  upon  the  character,  principles, 
former  beliefs,  or  personal  pecuharities  of  his 
opponent,  he  commits  the  special  form  of  this  fal- 
lacy known  as  argumentum  ad  hominem.  It  is 
obviously  fallacious  to  reason  that  a  principle  is 
214 


Methods  of  Refutation 

unsound  because  It  is  upheld  by  an  untrustworthy 
advocate,  or  because  it  is  inconsistent  with 'the  ad- 
vocate's former  beliefs  and  practices.  Honesty  is 
a  worthy  principle,  even  though  advocated  by  a 
thief.  '  The  duty  of  industry  is  no  less  binding  be- 
cause it  is  advocated  by  an  idler.  Lawyers  often 
commit  this  error  by  seeking  to  discredit  the  op- 
posing attorney.  Campaign  speakers  frequently 
attempt  to  overthrow  the  opposing  party's  platform 
by  showing  that  it  is  inconsistent  with  the  party's 
previous  measures  and  declarations.  To  bring  in 
such  irrelevant  matter  is  to  ignore  the  question. 

Closely  allied  to  argumentum  ad  hominem  is  an- 
other phase  of  ignoring  the  question  called  argu- 
mentum ad  poptdiim.  This  fallacy  consists  of  using 
before  a  certain  audience  statements  which  will 
strongly  appeal  to  their  prejudices  and  partisan 
views,  but  which  are  not  generally  accepted  facts 
and  which  would  undoubtedly  meet  with  strong  op- 
position elsewhere.  A  speaker  who  brings  in  this 
kind  of  argument  makes  use  neither  of  reasoning 
nor  of  legitimate  persuasion.  He  neglects  his 
proposition  and  attempts  to  excite  the  feelings  of  his 
audience  to  such  an  extent  as  to  render  them  in- 
capable of  forming  a  dispassionate  judgment  upon 
the  matter  in  hand. 


Methods  of  Refutation 

In  general,  it  is  necessary  only  to  point  out  a 
fallacy  to  weaken  an  argument.  Sometimes,  how- 
ever, the  error  is  so  involved  and  so  hidden  that, 
though  it  is  apparent  to  one  who  is  arguing,  yet 
it  is  not  easily  made  apparent  to  the  audience.  In 
overcoming  this  difficulty,  arguers  often  resort  to 
certain  peculiar  devices  of  arranging  and  present- 
ing the  material  for  refutation.  Long  experience 
has  shown  that  the  two  methods  given  here  are  of 
inestimable  value. 

I.     Reductio    ad    Absurdum    (Reducing    to    an 
Absurdity) 

The  method  of  refuting  an  argument  by  reduc- 
tio ad  absurdum  consists  of  showing  that  the  argu- 
ment to  be  refuted,  if  true,  proves  not  only  the  con- 
clusion given,  but  also  other  conclusions  which  are 
manifestly  absurd.  For  example,  a  debater  once 
contended  that  colleges  should  not  seek  to  root  out 
professionalism  in  athletic  sports,  because,  by  com- 
ing in  contact  with  college  life,  professional  play- 
ers receive  considerable  benefit.  His  opponent  an- 
swered him  by  showing  that  tlie  same  argument 
carried  out  to  its  logical  conclusion  would  prove 
that  a  college  should  encourage  the  attendance  of 
criminals  and  degenerates  on  the  ground  that  they 
216 


Methods  of  Refutation 

will  be  benefited  thereby.     Thus  he  reduced,  the  ar- 
gument to  a  manifest  absurdity. 

At  one  time  the  officers  of  a  national  bank  per- 
mitted their  institution  to  be  wrecked  by  certifying, 
and  thereby  practically  guaranteeing,  the  checks 
of  a  firm  of  stock  brokers  when  the  brokers  did 
not  have  the  money  represented  by  the  checks  de- 
posited in  the  bank.  This  was  distinctly  a  criminal 
offense.  The  brokers  failed,  and,  the  bank  having 
closed  its  doors  in  consequence,  the  president  of  the 
bank  was  brought  to  trial.  The  Atlantic  Monthly 
reduces  to  an  absurdity  the  chief  argument  used 
for  the  defense : 

A  jury  having  been  empaneled  to  try  him,  he  pleaded 
guilty,  his  counsel  urging,  as  a  reason  for  clemency,  that 
the  violation  of  this  statute  was  a  habit  of  the  New  York 
banks  in  the  Wall  Street  district,  and  that  if  the  wrecked 
bank  had  not  followed  this  law-breaking  custom  of  its  com- 
petitors the  stock  brokers  would  have  withdrawn  their  ac- 
count. The  plea  was  successful,  and  the  officer  escaped 
with  a  small  fine.  Imagine  a  burglar  or  a  pickpocket  urg- 
ing a  plea  for  clemency  based  on  the  general  business 
habits  and  customs  of  his  criminal  confreres !  ^ 

In  the  following  quotation  Henry  George  assails 
the  belief  that  priority  of  occupation  justly  carries 
with  it  the  ownership  of  land : 

1  Atlantic  Monthly,  94:173. 

217 


Methods  of  Refutation 

As  for  the  deduction  of  a  complete  and  exclusive  in- 
dividual right  to  land  from  priority  of  occupation,  that  is, 
if  possible,  the  most  absurd  ground  on  which  land  owner- 
ship can  be  defended.  Has  the  first  comer  at  a  banquet 
the  right  to  turn  back  all  the  chairs  and  claim  that  none 
of  the  other  guests  shall  partake  of  the  food  provided,  ex- 
cept as  they  make  terms  with  him?  Does  the  first  man 
who  presents  a  ticket  at  the  door  of  a  theater,  and  passes 
in,  acquire  by  his  priority  the  right  to  shut  the  doors  and 
have  the  performance  go  on  for  him  alone?  Does  the  first 
passenger  who  enters  a  railroad  car  obtain  the  right  to 
scatter  his  baggage  over  all  the  seats  and  compel  the  pas- 
sengers who  come  in  after  him  to  stand  up?  2 

College  students  are  continually  urging  as  a  de- 
fense of  professionalism  in  their  own  athletic  teams 
the  argument  that  since  other  colleges  employ  pro- 
fessional players  it  is  necessary  for  them  to  do 
likewise.  By  carrying  this  argument  a  step  farther, 
one  could  show,  with  equal  reason,  that  since 
drinking,  stealing,  and  cheating  are  prevalent  in 
other  colleges,  these  same  practices  should  also 
be  indulged  in  at  the  college  in  question.  In  the 
same  way  one  may  refute  by  reductio  ad  ahsur- 
dum  all  such  arguments  as,  "  Custom  has  ren- 
dered the  spoils  system  desirable " ;  "  The  preva- 
lency  of  the  high  license  law  shows  its  superiority 
to  prohibition " ;  "  Since  in  the  past  all  college 
students  were  required  to  study  Latin  and  Greek, 

2  Progress  and  Povertj',  p.   342. 

218 


Methods  of  Refutation 

these   subjects   should  be  required  at  the  present 
time." 

II.    The  Dilemma 

Another  device  that  an  arguer  will  often  find 
useful  when  he  wishes  to  refute  an  opponent's 
statement  is  the  dilemma.  In  the  dilemma  the 
arguer  shows  that  the  statement  he  wishes  to 
disprove  can  be  true  only  through  the  truth 
of  at  least  one  of  two  possibilities.  He  then 
proves  that  these  possibilities  are  untenable,  and 
therefore  the  original  statement  is  false.  To  rep- 
resent the  dilemma  with  letters:  The  truth  of  A 
rests  upon  the  truth  of  either  x  or  y ;  but  as  x  and  y 
are  both  false,  A  is  false.  According  to  the  exact 
meaning  of  the  word,  the  dilemma  applies  to  only 
two  untenable  positions;  the  process  is  exactly  the 
same,  however,  when  the  possibilities  are  more  nu- 
merous. 

The  argument  that  the  United  States  ought  to  dis- 
pose of  the  Philippines  immediately  is  frequently 
attacked  by  means  of  a  dilemma.  Those  who  favor 
retaining  the  islands  point  out  that  there  are  only 
two  methods  by  which  we  could  dispose  of  them :  to 
give  them  self-government,  or  to  turn  them  over  to 
some  other  nation.  The  "  imperialists  "  then  go  on 
219 


Methods  of  Refutation 

to  show  that  the  inhabitants  of  the  Philippines  are 
not  capable  of  ruling  themselves,  that  self-govern- 
ment would  mean  barbarism  and  anarchy ;  then  they 
prove  that  to  turn  the  islands  over  to  another  na- 
tion would  result  in  misrule  and  the  exploitation 
of  the  natives. 

While  urging  Virginia  to  join  the  Union  in  1788, 
Edmund  Randolph  made  use  of  the  dilemma  in 
answering  the  arguments  that  Virginia  should  re- 
main a  sovereign  nation  by  herself: 

If  Virginia  can  exist  without  the  Union,  she  must  de- 
rive that  ability  from  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  sources, 
namely:  from  her  natural  situation,  or  because  she  has 
no  cause  to  fear  from  other  nations.  What  is  her  situa- 
tion? She  is  very  accessible;  the  large,  capacious  bay  of 
Chesapeake,  which  is  but  too  excellentl}'  adapted  for  the 
admission  of  enemies,  renders  her  very  vulnerable.  She 
has  frontiers  adjoining  the  States  of  Pennsylvania,  Mary- 
land, and  North  Carolina.  Two  of  these  States  have  de- 
clared themselves  members  of  the  Union.  Will  she  be  in- 
accessible to  the  inhabitants  of  those  States?  ...  If  then, 
Sir,  Virginia,  from  her  situation,  is  not  inaccessible,  let  us 
consider  if  she  be  protected  by  having  no  cause  to  fear 
from  other  nations.  Have  you  no  cause  to  fear  from 
Spain,  whose  dominions  border  on  your  country?  Every 
nation,  every  people,  in  our  circumstances,  have  always  had 
abundant  cause  to  fear.  We  owe  a  debt  to  Spain :  do  v/e 
expect  indulgence  from  that  quarter?  Will  the  Dutch  be 
silent  about  the  debt  due  to  them?  Is  there  any  pretension 
that  any  one  of  these  nations  will  be  patient?  The  debts 
due  the  British  are  also  very  considerable ;  these  debts  have 

220 


Methods  of  Refutation 

been  witheld  contrary  to  treaty;  if  Great  Britain  will  de- 
mand the  payment  of  these  debts  peremptorily,  what  will 
be  the  consequences?  Can  we  pay  them  if  demanded? 
Will  no  danger  result  from  a  refusal?  .  .  .  Thus,  Sir,  I 
hope  I  have  satisfied  you  that  we  are  unsafe  without  a 
union,  and  that  in  union  alone  safety  consists. 

In  conversation  and  debate,  the  dilemma  is  fre- 
quently introduced  by  means  of  a  question.  The 
debater,  wishing  to  trap  his  opponent,  asks  him  a 
pertinent  question  which  previous  investigation  has 
shown  can  possibly  be  answered  in  only  two  or 
three  ways,  and  which  the  opponent  cannot  afford 
to  answer  at  all.  A  good  illustration  of  this  de- 
vice occurs  in  the  New  Testament: 

And  it  came  to  pass,  on  one  of  the  days,  as  he  was 
teaching  the  people  in  the  temple,  and  preaching  the  gospel, 
there  came  upon  him  the  chief  priests  and  the  scribes  with 
the  elders ;  and  they  spake,  saying  unto  him,  Tell  us :  By 
what  authority  doest  thou  these  things?  or  who  is  he  that 
gave  thee  this  authority?  And  he  answered  and  said  unto 
them,  I  also  will  ask  you  a  question  and  tell  me:  The 
baptism  of  John,  was  it  from  heaven,  or  from  men?  And 
they  reasoned  with  themselves,  saying.  If  we  shall  say, 
From  heaven;  he  will  say.  Why  did  ye  not  believe  him? 
But  if  we  shall  say.  From  men ;  all  the  people  will  stone  us : 
for  they  be  persuaded  that  John  wal  a  prophet.  And 
they  answered,  that  they  knew  not  whence  it  was.  And 
Jesus  said  unto  them,  Neither  tell  I  you  by  what  authority 
I  do  these  things.^ 

3  Luke  XX,  1-8. 


221 


Methods  of  Refutation 

Before  one  can  safely  use  the  dilemma  he  must 
carefully  investigate  every  phase  of  the  statement 
that  he  wishes  to  refute.  If  he  is  to  use  the  di- 
lemma directly,  he  must  consider  every  possibiUty  — 
commonly  called  the  horns  of  the  dilemma  —  upon 
which  the  truth  of  the  statement  may  rest.  If 
there  is  a  single  possibility  which  he  is  not  ready 
to  meet  and  overthrow,  his  whole  effort  is  fruitless. 
For  instance,  a  debater,  in  attempting  to  rebut  the 
statement  that  college  fraternities  are  harmful,  said 
that  his  opponent  must  show  that  fraternities  are 
either  morally,  socially,  financially  or  intellectually 
detrimental  to  their  members;  he  then  proved  as 
best  he  could  that  in  these  respects  fraternities  are 
beneficial  rather  than  harmful,  and  sat  down  think- 
ing that  he  had  gone  a  long  way  toward  winning 
the  debate.  His  opponent  then  arose  and  admitting 
nearly  everything  that  had  been  said,  based  his  ar- 
gument on  the  idea  that  fraternities  were  harmful 
to  the  college  as  a  zvhole.  The  first  speaker  had 
not  considered  every  alternative.  If  an  arguer  is  to 
approach  a  dilemma  through  the  medium  of  a  ques- 
tion, he  must  be  sure  that  he  knows  every  reason- 
able answer  that  his  opponent  can  make.  When 
one  has  satisfied  these  conditions,  he  can  use  the 
dilemma  with  great  effect. 

222 


Methods  of  Refutation 

By  way  of  summary  it  may  be  said  that  the  suc- 
cessful arguer  must  both  build  up  his  own  proof 
and  destroy  his  opponent's.  To  accomplish  the  lat- 
ter one  has  to  know  what  to  refute  and  what  to 
leave  alone;  he  must  distinguish  between  the  im- 
portant and  the  unessential,  and  he  must  take  care 
not  to  *'  refute  himself."  Since  proof  consists  of 
evidence  and  reasoning,  the  first  step  for  him  to 
take  in  refuting  an  argument  is  to  apply  the  tests 
for  each,  and  if  possible  show  where  his  opponent 
has  erred.  In  the  next  place,  he  should  see  whether 
he  can  discover  and  point  out  any  of  the  more  im- 
portant fallacies;  the  ones  mentioned  here  are  beg- 
ging the  question,  ambiguous  terms,  false  cause, 
composition  and  dizision,  and  ignoring  the  ques- 
tion. Should  the  arguer  find  any  of  these  funda- 
mental weaknesses,  it  is  ordinarily  sufficient  merely 
to  call  attention  to  them ;  for  the  sake  of  emphasis, 
however,  one  may  make  use  of  two  especially  ef- 
fective methods  of  refutation,  reductio  ad  absurdum 
and  the  dilemma. 

EXERCISES 

A.  Criticize  the  following  arguments;  point  out  and 
name  the  fallacies  they  contain : 

I.  Since  the  State  is  made  up  of  occupational  groups,  the 
welfare  of  the  State  is  the  sum  of  the  welfare  of  all  these 
occupational  groups. 

223 


Methods  of  Refutation 

2.  The  jury  system  could  hardly  be  adapted  to  our  mod- 
ern civilization,  since  it  had  its  origin  a  great  many  years 
ago. 

3.  If  most  men  who  have  been  in  prison  lead  criminal 
lives  afterwards,  is  there  any  doubt  that  prisons  exercise  a 
debasing  influence? 

4.  This  argument  for  socialism  is  unsound.  I  admit 
that  the  author  of  the  article  is  a  skilful,  plausible  writer, 
but  he  has  been  under  the  ban  of  the  law.  A  few  years 
ago  he  spent  ten  months  in  the  penitentiary,  convicted  of 
having  incited  a  riot. 

5.  It  is  certain  that  the  X automobile  is  the  best 

machine  manufactured  in  the  United  States,  because  it  is 
put  out  by  the  most  reUable  company.    We  know  that  the 

X Company  is  the  most  reliable  manufacturing  firm  in 

the   business,   because   it   manufactures    the   best   automo- 
bile. 

6.  It  being  admittedly  the  duty  of  the  State  to  protect  its 
citizens  even  when  they  are  abroad,  New  York  should  re- 
quire Mexico  to  show  every  courtesy  to  those  members  of 
the  commonwealth  who  are  now  at  Vera  Cruz. 

7.  Alabama  is  a  Democratic  State;  Coosa  County  is  a 
Democratic  county ;  therefore  John  Smith  of  Coosa  County 
is  a  Democrat. 

/8.  The  Senator-elect  will  be  a  great  orator,  for  he  is  able 
to  reason  clearly  —  a  faculty  that  all  eloquent  speakers  pos- 
sess. 

9.  The  engineering  school  has  an  excellent  course  of 
study  since  each  subject  in  its  curriculum  is  important  and 
practical. 

10.  Since  the  university  is  now  building  a  modern,  com- 
modious gymnasium,  it  will  have  a  superior  football  team 
next  fall. 

11.  This  man  represents  the  kind  of  people  that  live  in 
Century,  because  he  represents  that  town  in  the  Legisla- 
ture. 

224 


Methods  of  Refutation 

12.  College  students  being,  as  a  rule,  the  most  energetic 
and  the  brightest  young  men  in  the  country,  it  is  safe  to 
conclude  that  the  president  of  the  junior  class  is  a  person 
of  unusual  attainments. 

13.  A  man  who  passes  under  a  ladder  will  meet  with 
misfortune  soon  afterwards. 

14.  To  prove  that  Congress  erred  in  not  constructing  a 
sea-Ie\'el  canal  at  Panama,  I  shall  attempt  to  show  you, 
first,  how  much  traffic  now  crosses  the  Atlantic  that  for- 
merly passed  through  the  Mediterranean. 

15.  A  State  constabulary  is  considered  a  necessity  in 
Pennsylvania ;  therefore  a  State  constabulary  should  be  or- 
ganized in  Rhode  Island. 

16.  I  am  to  speak  this  evening  about  the  honor  system, 
and  I  shall  endeavor  to  prove  that  our  college  ought  to 
adopt  this  practicable,  character-developing  method  of 
holding  examinations. 

17.  Since  whatever  system  fails  at  Harvard  will  cer- 
tainly fail  at  this  college,  we  should  not  adopt  the  fully 
elective  system  of  studies. 

18.  The  incompetency  of  the  present  session  of  the  Leg- 
islature is  attested  by  the  useless  laws  that  it  has  passed. 
Of  course  these  laws  are  useless;  they  were  made  by 
the  most  incompetent  Legislature  we  have  had  in  twenty- 
live  years. 

19.  Government  Is  a  blessing.  Despotism  Is  one  form 
of  government;  therefore  despotism  is  a  blessing. 

20.  All  great  leaders  have  been  men  who  inspired  con- 
fidence. Since  this  candidate  for  the  Presidency  Inspires 
confidence,  he  will  be  a  great  leader. 

B.  Refute  the  following  statements  and  name  thel 
method  of  refutation  employed  In  each  case: 

1.  It  is  practicable  to  reduce  the  four  years'  course  in 
this  college  to  three  years. 

2.  We  should  not  adopt  the  Initiative  and  referendum 

225 


Methods  of  Refutation 

form  of   government,   inasmuch   as   this   system  was   not 
thought  of  by  the  founders  of  our  nation. 

3.  In  the  recent  gubernatorial  election  in  New  York  the 
amount  of  illegal  voting  was  unusual;  both  the  New  York 
Journal  and  the  Boston  American  testify  to  this. 

4.  Since  playing  pool  costs  money,  college  students 
should  not  indulge  in  this  form  of  recreation. 

5.  The  employment  of  the  best  athletic  coach  in  the  coun- 
try will  certainly  give  the  college  a  championship  team. 

6.  The  Panama  Canal  does  not  need  fortifications. 

7.  The  honor  system  has  succeeded  at  Princeton ;  it  v/ill 
always  succeed  where  it  is  given  a  fair  trial. 

8.  The  preparedness  of  our  navy  and  the  brisk  recruiting 
in  our  army  show  that  war  is  imminent. 

9.  In  the  contest  between  England  and  the  Boers  it  was 
right  that  Americans  should  sympathize  with  the  South 
Africans,  because  they  were  the  weaker  side. 

ID.  It  is  an  established  fact  that  the  reduction  in  the 
tariff  has  benefited  the  country;  no  less  a  person  than 
Woodrow  Wilson  has  said  so. 

C.  Put  the  following  article  into  the  form  of  a  brief 
and  show  exactly  what  methods  of  refutation  are  used : 

Government  Ownership 

One  of  the  persistent  claims  of  the  advocates  of  the  ex- 
tension of  governmental  functions  is  that  if  the  State  or 
the  municipahty  undertakes  to  operate  large  business  prop- 
erties, then  the  community  at  large  will  take  a  greater  in- 
terest in  government  and  the  business  taken  over  will  be 
run  more  successfully.  This  has  a  most  plausible  sound, 
but  experience  fails  to  lead  to  this  conclusion. 

Take  as  a  concrete  example  the  Post  Office  Department. 
Its  business  methods  are  such  as  would  put  a  private  en- 
terprise in  a  receiver's  hands  —  yet  the  people  care  little 
for  its  management.  The  buildings  occupied  by  the  Post 
226 


Methods  of  Refutation 

Office  and  owned  by  the  United  States  are  given  to  the 
Post  Office  Department,  and  lighted  and  cared  for  at  the 
expense  of  the  Treasury  Department.  Yet  if  at  the  end 
of  the  year  the  Post  Office  shows  a  meager  excess  of  rev- 
enue over  expenses,  the  people  declare  it  a  business  suc- 
cess. 

"Strikes  will  be  eliminated,"  is  the  often-made  state- 
ment of  those  believing  in  government  enterprises.  Un- 
fortunately strikes  have  not  been  eliminated  —  as,  for  in- 
stance, the  Australian  and  the  French  railway  strikes,  the 
gas-workers'  strikes  in  England,  and  in  this  country  there 
have  been  strikes  of  street  laborers,  and  once  a  strike  of 
letter-carriers. 

A  frequent  claim  is  made  that  labor  conditions  under 
public  ownership  are  better  as  regards  hours  of  labor, 
wages,  safe  conditions  of  operation,  and  so  forth.  If  this 
were  true,  it  would  merely  mean  that  the  methods  em- 
ployed are  such  as  will  increase  the  cost  of  the  service  at 
the  expense  of  the  users  and  lead  to  the  estabHshment  of  a 
privileged  class  of  workers.  So  far  as  working  conditions 
are  concerned,  careful  investigation  will  fail  to  show  any 
appreciable  difference  between  publicly  and  privately  owned 
utilities.  As  an  instance  of  the  failure  of  public  employ- 
ment to  give  greater  consideration  to  the  comfort  and 
safety  of  the  workingman  than  does  private  employment, 
we  may  compare  the  work  of  the  railway  mail  clerks  with 
that  of  the  baggage-men  laboring  on  the  same  train. 


22*J 


CHAPTER  IX 

DEBATE  — SOME     PRACTICAL     SUGGES- 
TIONS 

Debate  has  been  defined  as  the  oral  presenta- 
tion of  argument  under  conditions  that  allow  both 
sides  to  be  heard.  In  both  class-room  and  inter- 
collegiate debating  each  debater  usually  makes  two 
speeches,  a  main  speech  and  a  rebuttal  speech.  The 
main  speech  ordinarily  extends  over  a  period  of 
from  seven  to  twelve  minutes,  according  to  the  rules 
governing  the  contest,  and  is  largely  constructive 
in  nature.  The  rebuttal  speech,  commonly  called 
the  rebuttal,  is  usually  a  little  more  than  half  the 
length  of  the  main  speech,  and  is  for  the  most 
part  destructive.  It  is  almost  superfluous  to  add 
that  both  sides  are  allowed  exactly  the  same  amount 
of  time  in  which  to  present  their  arguments;  that 
the  affirmative  side  speaks  first,  the  order  being, 
when  there  are  several  debaters,  affirmative,  nega- 
tive, affirmative,  negative,  and  so  on;  and  that  all 
the  main  speeches  are  given  before  either  side  makes 
228 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

a  rebuttal  speech.  If  there  is  only  one  debater  on 
each  side,  it  is  undoubtedly  best  for  the  affirmative 
to  offer  the  first  rebuttal;  if  there  are  several  de- 
baters, the  order  is  usually  reversed.  The  debaters 
on  either  side  may  or  may  not  speak  in  rebuttal  in 
the  same  order  as  in  the  main  argument. 

HOW  TO  PREPARE  FOR  DEBATE 

In  several  ways  the  work  of  the  debater  differs 
from  the  work  of  one  who  is  preparing  a  written 
argument  or  who  is  to  speak  without  being  con- 
fronted by  an  opponent.  As  far  as  the  completion 
of  the  brief,  the  work  in  all  cases  is  the  same,  but 
at  this  point  the  debater  has  to  decide  what  special 
preparation  he  shall  make  for  handling  and  pre- 
senting to  the  audience  the  material  that  he  has 
collected.  He  is  puzzled  to  know  whether  it  will 
be  worth  while  to  expand  his  brief ;  and  if  he  does 
expand  it,  he  is  in  doubt  as  to  just  what  he  should 
do  with  the  expanded  argument. 

A  debater  has  his  choice  of  several  possible 
methods  of  procedure.  The  simplest,  though  not 
the  most  effective  method,  is  to  write  out  the  argu- 
m^ent  in  full,  and  to  memorize  it  word  for  v/ord. 
The  weakness  of  such  a  course  lies  in  the  immo- 
22g 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

bility  of  its  attack  and  defense.  The  first  speaker 
for  the  affirmative  may  decide  beforehand  exactly 
what  he  will  say  and  the  order  in  which  he  will 
say  it,  but  all  those  who  are  to  follow  should 
adapt  their  arguments,  to  some  extent  at  least, 
to  the  exigencies  of  the  debate.  They  will  find  it 
desirable  to  make  a  change  in  one  place  in  order 
to  join  their  arguments  harmoniously  to  those  of 
their  colleagues;  they  will  wish  to  make  changes 
in  another  place  for  the  sake  of  assailing  an  obvi- 
ously weak  spot  or  in  order  to  ward  off  an  unex- 
pected attack.  This  versatility  is  practically  im- 
possible if  one  is  delivering  an  argument  that  he 
has  memorized  word  for  word.  Again,  a  memo- 
rized argument  cannot  carry  with  it  the  force  and 
the  conviction  that  may  be  found  in  an  effort  of  a 
more  spontaneous  character.  Furthermore,  if  a  de- 
bater should  be  so  unfortunate  as  to  forget  even  a 
few  words  of  a  memorized  selection,  he  would 
probably  be  forced  to  sit  down  with  his  speech  only 
partially  completed. 

Another  method  that  some  debaters  follow  is  to 
memorize  portions  of  their  argument  and  to  ex- 
temporize the  rest.  This  is  open  to  two  great  ob- 
jections: first,  it  is  difficult  to  join  together  grace- 
fully the  memorized  passages  and  the  extemporized ; 
230 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

second,  the  very  smoothness  with  which  the  mem- 
orized passages  are  delivered  betrays  the  crudeness 
and  awkwardness  of  the  extemporized  parts. 

A  third  method,  and  undoubtedly  the  best  one  for 
the  student  to  adopt,  is  not  to  expand  the  brief 
before  he  debates,  but  to  memorize  the  greater  part 
of  it  a^  a  brief.  In  this  way  a  debater  has  his  ideas 
well  in  hand,  and,  without  being  tied  down  to  any 
particular  manner  of  expression  or  obliged  to  follow 
any  set  order  of  procedure,  he  can  use  his  material 
as  opportunity  requires.  His  language  should  be 
at  least  partially  extemporaneous;  he  may  have  a 
fairly  clear  conception  of  how  he  is  to  frame  his 
sentences,  but  he  should  have  nothing  learned  word 
for  word.  Thus  his  speech  may  have  an  element 
of  spontaneity  that  will  give  it  a  tone  of  sincerity 
and  earnestness  unattainable  when  one  is  repeating 
a  memorized  passage.  Too  much,  however,  must 
not  be  left  to  the  inspiration  of  the  moment;  no 
student  should  ever  try  to  debate  without  first  at- 
tempting in  his  room  to  expand  his  brief  orally. 
He  is  sure  to  meet  with  considerable  difficulty  the 
first  time  he  tries  to  formulate  his  ideas  in  clear, 
forceful,  and  elegant  language ;  but  several  attempts 
will  produce  a  remarkable  change.  After  a  few 
endeavors  he  will  discover  ways  of  expressing  him- 
231 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

self  that  he  will  remember,  even  though  the  words 
vary  greatly  each  time. 

The  superiority  of  this  method  is  marked.  It 
enables  the  debater  to  become  perfectly  familiar 
w^th  all  his  material,  and  it  gives  him  a  fairly  good 
idea  of  what  language  he  shall  use.  He  is  not, 
however,  bound  down  to  any  set  speech;  he  can 
alter  his  argument  to  suit  the  occasion.  Should 
he  unexpectedly  find  that  his  opponent  has  admitted 
a  certain  idea,  he  can  merely  call  attention  to  this 
fact  and  not  waste  valuable  time  in  giving  super- 
fluous proof.  If  he  sees  that  his  opponent  has  made 
such  a  strong  argument  that  some  refutation  is 
necessary  at  the  outset  in  order  to  gain  the  confi- 
dence of  his  audience,  he  can  instantly  change  the 
order  of  his  proof  and  begin  with  a  point  that  he 
had,  perhaps,  intended  to  use  in  another  part  of 
his  speech.  In  fact,  this  method  enables  one  to 
debate  rather  than  to  declaim. 

In  most  debating  contests  it  is  permissible  for  the 
contestants  to  make  use  of  a  few  notes  written  on 
small  cards  that  can  be  carried  in  a  pocket  or 
held  unobtrusively  in  the  hand.  Such  a  practice,  if 
not  abused,  is  commended  by  some  teachers  of  ar- 
gumentation. On  these  cards  the  debater  can  put 
232 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

down  the  main  headings  of  his  brief,  all  statistics 
that  are  difficult  to  remember,  and  all  quotations. 
He  had  better  not  refer  to  these  cards  for  the  head- 
ings of  his  brief  if  he  can  possibly  avoid  doing  so. 
It  will  be  a  great  stimulus,  however,  for  him  to  know 
that  he  has  this  help  to  rely  on  in  case  of  neces- 
sity. Statistics  and  quotations  he  may  read  with- 
out hesitation. 

One  should  speak  his  debate  many  times  by  him- 
self, not  only  for  the  purpose  of  gaining  facility 
in  expression,  but  also  for  the  sake  of  condensing 
his  material  to  an  argument  that  will  approximately 
occupy  the  exact  time  allowed  him  for  debating. 
It  is  a  deplorable  fact  that  many  debaters  try  to  say 
so  much  that  when  their  allotment  of  time  has 
expired  they  find  themselves  in  the  very  midst  of 
their  argument.  Such  an  ending  leaves  the  audi- 
ence confused  and  unimpressed.  No  debater  should 
ever  omit  his  conclusion.  If  there  is  only  one  con- 
testant on  each  side,  a  conclusion  is  certainly  neces- 
sary both  for  the  sake  of  clearness  and  emphasis, 
and  because  an  unfinished  argument  is  not  a  unit. 
If  there  are  several  contestants  on  each  side,  the  fact 
that  the  opposing  speakers  intervene  and  distract  the 
attention  of  the  audience  makes  it  even  more  neces- 
233 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

sary  that  each  debater  end  his  argument  with  a 
formal  conclusion,  and  by  means  of  it  bind  his  work 
to  that  of  his  colleagues. 

REFUTATION 

As  much  time,  if  not  more,  should  be  spent  in 
preparing  the  destructive  as  in  preparing  the  con- 
structive portion  of  an  argument.  One  can  deter- 
mine beforehand  almost  exactly  how  he  will  estab- 
lish his  side  of  the  proposition,  but  just  what  ma- 
terial he  will  need  to  overthrow  his  opponent's 
proof  w^ll  depend  upon  how  that  proof  is  con- 
structed. Ordinarily  one  can  predict  what  lines  of 
reasoning  an  opponent  will  take;  in  fact,  no  one 
should  ever  attempt  to  debate  until  he  has  studied 
the  proposition  so  thoroughly  that  he  can  antici- 
pate practically  all  the  arguments  that  will  be  ad- 
vanced. Yet  until  he  sees  on  what  points  the  em- 
phasis is  placed,  what  arguments  are  ignored,  and 
what  evidence  is  used,  he  cannot  tell  positively  what 
facts  and  what  inferences  will  be  most  valuable  as 
refutation.  Therefore,  a  debater  who  wishes  to 
offer  good  refutation  must  have  a  wealth  of  material 
at  his  command  and  be  able  to  select  instantly  the 
ideas  that  will  be  of  the  greatest  value. 
234 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

This  necessity  for  an  abundance  of  information 
precludes  the  idea,  held  by  some,  that  good  de- 
baters depend  for  their  refutation  on  the  inspira- 
tion of  the  m.oment.  Great  speakers  often  spend 
incalculable  time  in  preparing  to  answer  the  argu- 
ments of  the  opposition.  Webster's  Reply  to 
Hayne,  which  is  a  recognized  masterpiece  of  oratory, 
and  which  is  almost  entirely  refutation,  was  at  first 
thought  to  have  been  composed  over  night,  but 
Webster  declared  that  all  the  material  he  had  used 
had  lain  in  his  desk  for  months. 

Refutation  should  come  for  the  most  part,  though 
not  entirely,  in  the  rebuttal.  Unless  one  has  made 
a  thorough  study  of  both  sides  of  the  question,  and 
is  thus  sure  of  his  ground,  anticipatory  refutation 
is  dangerous.  It  is  sometimes  an  excellent  plan 
to  take  the  wind  out  of  an  opponent's  sails  by  over- 
throwing an  argument  of  his  before  he  has  a  chance 
to  present  it,  but  in  doing  this  the  debater  must  use 
the  greatest  caution.  To  begin  with,  he  must  be 
sure  that  the  argument  he  refutes  is  of  such  a  fun- 
damental nature  that  it  is  essential  to  the  case  of 
the  other  side,  for  if  his  opponent  fails  to  use  this 
point,  the  debater  not  only  has  exposed  himself  to 
ridicule,  but  has  wasted  valuable  time.  When  one 
does  refute  in  advance  a  point  that  must  be  up- 
235 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

held  by  the  opposition,  a  skilful  opponent  often 
can,  by  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  even  those 
on  the  other  side  recognize  the  importance  and 
strength  of  this  argument,  destroy  much  of  the  ad- 
vantage that  has  been  gained.  To  refute  an  argu- 
ment before  it  is  advanced,  sometimes  brings  fail- 
ure and  sometimes  brings  success.  A  debater  must 
exercise  judgment. 

One  must  also  exercise  a  high  degree  of  judg- 
ment in  deciding  where  he  can  most  advantageously 
answer  the  arguments  that  have  actually  been  given. 
Whenever  a  debater  presents  so  thorough  and  so 
strong  proof  that  the  audience  is  likely  to  think 
that  he  has  settled  the  question  and  won  the  debate, 
the  succeeding  speaker  on  the  opposite  side  will 
have  great  difficulty  in  making  any  impression  un- 
less he  can  at  the  start  at  least  partially  discredit 
the  preceding  argument.  The  attitude  of  the  audi- 
ence will  compel  him  to  use  refutation  before  be- 
ginning his  constructive  work.  On  the  other  hand, 
if  the  preceding  argument  has  apparently  produced 
but  little  effect,  he  may  at  once  begin  to  build  his 
own  proof.  He  should,  however,  show  good  rea- 
son for  postponing  his  refutation.  To  ignore  the 
previous  arguments  entirely,  or  arbitrarily  to  post- 
236 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

pone  answering  them,  is  likely  to  give  the  audience 
an  unfavorable  impression. 

Common  errors  in  refutation.  A  common  er- 
ror in  refutation  is  the  failure  to  attack  an  oppo- 
nent's main  arguments.  Students  especially  are 
wont  to  neglect  fundamental  principles,  and  instead 
of  overthrowing  the  points  that  count,  occupy  inval- 
uable time  with  trivial  matters.  To  rebut  unimpor- 
tant details,  admitted  matter,  mere  illustrations,  and 
errors  obviously  due  to  haste  in  speaking,  is  a  fault 
that  every  debater  should  carefully  avoid.  Such 
trivialities  the  audience  immediately  forgets,  and 
to  bring  them  up  again  and  refute  them  serves  no 
worthy  purpose  whatever. 

Another  serious  fault  common  to  refutation  in 
student  debates  is  lack  of  coherence.  The  student 
falls  into  this  error  when  he  rebuts  a  miscellaneous 
lot  of  points  without  having  first  ascertained  the 
function  of  each  and  differentiated  the  main  ideas 
from  the  subordinate  ones.  Instead  of  looking  at 
the  argument  as  a  whole  and  attacking  it  with  the 
concerted  strength  of  all  his  forces,  he  fires  scatter- 
ing shots,  and  does  but  little  damage.  In  refuta- 
tion a  debater  must  first  see  clearly  the  relation 
between  each  point  that  he  rebuts  and  the  proposi- 
237 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

tion ;  otherwise  his  work  is  wasted.  Secondly,  he 
must  make  this  relation  perfectly  plain  to  the  audi- 
ence. Instead  of  overthrowing  isolated  statements, 
a  debater  should  take  up  his  opponent's  case  as 
a  zuhole  and  weaken  it  as  much  as  he  can.  He 
should  attack  each  main  point.  Coherent  refuta- 
tion adds  much  to  the  effectiveness  of  a  debate. 

Availability  of  material  for  refutation.  In  of- 
fering refutation,  every  inexperienced  debater  has 
difficulty  in  laying  his  hands  on  just  the  material 
that  he  desires  to  use.  Possibly  he  remembers  that 
he  has  seen  somewhere  an  article  that  proves  the  in- 
sincerity of  a  man  who  has  just  been  quoted  as 
an  authority;  but  if  he  can  neither  produce  this 
article  nor  state  its  substance,  he  might  as  well  not 
know  about  it.  Perhaps  he  remembers  having  seen 
a  table  of  statistics  showing  that  his  opponent  has 
erred  in  regard  to  the  death  rate  in  the  Spanish- 
American  War ;  but  unless  he  can  produce  the  table, 
his  knowledge  is  of  no  avail.  There  is  scarcely  any 
time  for  searching  through  books  or  unorganized 
notes ;  material  to  be  of  use  must  be  instantly  avail- 
able. Some  definite  system  of  arranging  rebuttal 
material  is  absolutely  indispensable. 

One  method  that  has  been  tried  with  great  suc- 
cess consists  of  putting  down  on  cards  of  a  uniform 

238 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

size  all  the  material  that  can  possibly  be  of  use  in 
refutation.  These  cards  the  debater  then  groups, 
in  alphabetical  order,  under  headings  that  cor- 
respond to  the  main  divisions  of  the  subject  under 
discussion,  and  if  it  seems  advisable  in  any  particu- 
lar instance,  he  may  group  them  under  subdivisions 
of  the  proposition.  To  be  more  explicit,  if  a  de- 
bater thinks  that  the  opposition  may  question  the 
financial  success  of  a  plan  that  he  is  advocating, 
he  should  write  out  on  as  many  cards  as  are  neces- 
sary, usually  putting  only  one  idea  on  each  card,  all 
the  material  that  goes  to  show  why  the  plan  should 
succeed  and  where  it  has  succeeded.  Furthermore, 
if  the  plan  has  failed  anywhere,  he  should  put  down, 
providing  he  is  able,  explanations  that  will  ac- 
count for  the  failure  without  condemning  the  sys- 
tem. These  cards,  then,  would  naturally  be  ar- 
ranged under  some  such  heading  as  "  Finance  "  or 
"  Success."  If  the  debater  wishes,  he  may  also 
arrange  his  cards  under  subheadings.  For  instance, 
those  cards  that  go  to  show  why  the  plan  ought  to 
succeed  could  be  put  under  the  subheading,  ''  Ante- 
cedent Probability  " ;  those  that  show  where  the  plan 
has  succeeded,  under  "  Sign,"  and  those  that  ac- 
count for  failure  of  the  plan  in  certain  places,  un- 
der the  heading  "  Failures."  Any  one  at  all  famil- 
239 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

lar  with  a  library  card  catalogue  will  at  once  see 
the  various  possibilities  for  arranging  these  cards. 

Cards  for  rebuttal  should  be  made  out  about  as 
follows : 

Proposition:  Resolved,  That  profit-sharing  and 
cooperative  methods  generally  afford  the  most  prom- 
ising solution  of  the  labor  problem.     (Affirmative.) 


PRACTICABILITY 


Practicability 

The   Union    Polishing   Metal   Plating 
pany   has    been    successfully   operating 
this  method  since  1902.     (C.  H.  Quinn, 
look,  yz  :452.) 

Com- 

under 

Out- 

240 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 


Practicability 

The  great  iron  works  of  Evansville,  Wis., 
are  operated  under  this  method.  (G.  L.  Mc- 
Nutt,  Independent,  55:619.) 


The  advantages  of  such  a  system  are  obvious. 
This  method  gives  not  only  one  debater,  but  the 
whole  team,  almost  instant  command  of  all  the  ma- 
terial that  has  been  collected.  One  can  find  what 
he  wants,  and  find  it  hastily;  he  is  not  obliged  to 
spend  much  valuable  time  in  hunting  after  needed 
evidence  and  thus  neglect  large  portions  of  the 
speech  that  is  being  delivered.  A  debater  should 
begin  on  the  classification  of  rebuttal  material  al- 
most as  soon  as  he  begins  to  read  on  his  subject. 
In  this  way  he  will  save  all  the  material  that  he 
gathers,  and  his  catalogued  information  will  be  of 
assistance  to  him  in  drawing  his  brief  and  in  con- 
structing his  main  argument  as  w^ell  as  in  making 
refutation  at  the  time  of  the  debate. 

WHAT  EACH  DEBATER  MUST  DO 

The    first    speaker    for    the    afHrmative.     The 
first  speaker  for  the  affirm.ative  should  be  of  an  ag- 
241 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

gressive  temperament  —  in  fact,  aggressive  men, 
as  a  rule,  make  the  best  affirmative  debaters  and 
conservative  men  the  best  negative  debaters.  Upon 
the  first  speaker  falls  the  duty  of  interpreting  the 
proposition.  Since  the  subject  of  analysis  has  al- 
ready been  fully  discussed,  but  few  directions  need 
be  given  here.  It  may  be  well,  however,  to  em- 
phasize the  qualities  of  clearness  and  fairness.  A 
debate,  unHke  a  written  argument,  cannot  be  studied 
and  re-read  time  and  again.  For  this  reason,  unless 
the  proposition  is  explained  in  the  very  simplest 
language  and  by  means  of  the  very  clearest  defini- 
tions and  illustrations,  many  people  in  the  audience 
will  not  understand  wliat  the  debate  is  about.  Long 
words  and  high-sounding  phrases  have  no  place  here. 
The  debater  must  aim  to  reach  not  merely  those  who 
are  familiar  with  the  subject,  but  also  those  to  whom 
the  question  is  absolutely  new.  If,  when  the  first 
speaker  has  finished,  any  attentive  listener  of  average 
intelligence  fails  to  understand  both  the  subject  of 
the  debate  and  the  attitude  of  the  affirmative  side, 
the  speech  has  been  a  failure. 

Then,  too,  the  analysis  of  the  proposition  must 
be  fair  and  just  to  both  sides.     A  debater  has  no 
right  to  strain  or  twist  the  meaning  of  the  proposi- 
tion so  as  to  gain  any  advantage  for  himself.     In 
242 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

the  first  place,  this  practice  is  dishonest,  and  an 
honorable  debater  does  not  wish  to  win  by  trickery 
or  fraud.  Secondly,  such  an  act  almost  always 
brings  defeat.  The  fact  that  a  debate  is  being  held, 
presupposes  a  subject  about  which  reasonable  men 
may  differ.  If  a  debater  interprets  the  proposition 
so  that  only  one  reasonable  side  exists,  manifestly 
he  must  be  in  error,  and  upon'  the  exposure  of  this 
error  he  is  sure  to  lose  the  decision. 

In  debate,  therefore,  clearness  and  fairness 
should  especially  characterize  the  four  steps  that  are 
taken  in  analyzing  the  proposition :  to  define  termis, 
to  explain  the  proposition  as  a  w^hole,  to  discover 
the  issues,  and  to  make  the  partition. 

Upon  the  completion  of  the  introduction,  the  first 
debater  for  the  affirmative  proceeds  to  the  discus- 
sion, and  later,  should  he  be  the  only  contestant 
on  the  affirmative  side,  to  the  conclusion.  But  if, 
as  is  usually  the  case,  there  be  several  debaters  on 
each  side,  he  takes  up  only  one  or  two  main  points 
of  the  discussion.  Since  the  burden  of  proof  always 
rests  on  the  affirmative,  the  first  speaker  in  the  argu- 
ment proper,  as  a  rule,  points  out  the  weaknesses  in 
existing  conditions,  leaving  to  his  colleagues  the  task 
of  presenting  the  advantages  of  a  change.  In  han- 
dling his  proof  he  must  be  sure  so  to  correlate  his 
243  • 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

work  with  the  work  of  his  colleagues  that,  in  the 
minds  of  the  audience,  it  will  all  hang  together  a.s 
a  united  whole.  To  accomplish  this  object,  he  may, 
as  he  finishes  with  his  partition,  state  what  points  he 
will  discuss  himself,  and  what  points  will  be  handled 
by  the  affirmative  speakers  that  are  to  succeed  him ; 
and  he  must,  without  fail,  when  he  nears  the  end  of 
his  allotted  time,  hastily  summarize  the  proof  that  he 
has  given,  and  outline  the  proof  that  is  to  follow. 
In  this  way  he  may  keep  the  intervening  speeches 
of  his  opponents  from  entirely  destroying  the  con- 
tinuity that  should  exist  between  his  speech  and  the 
speeches  of  his  colleagues. 

The  first  speaker  for  the  negative.  It  rests 
with  the  first  speaker  for  the  negative  to  determine 
whether  the  introduction  as  presented  by  the  afhmi- 
ative  is  satisfactory,  w^hether  the  analysis  of  the 
proposition  is  clear,  adequate,  and  fair.  If  the  af- 
firmative has  erred  in  any  respect,  it  is  the  duty 
of  the  first  negative  debater  to  supply  the  defi- 
ciency or  make  the  correction;  otherwise  he  errs 
equally  with  the  afifimiative.  If  the  affirmative 
has  failed  to  explain  the  proposition  so  that  it 
is  generally  understood,  the  negative  is  sure  to 
win  favor  with  the  audience  by  spending  a  few 
moments  in  elucidating  the  subject  of  controversy. 
244 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

If  the  affirmative  debater  has  analyzed  the  question 
inadequately  or  unfairly,  the  negative  debater  should 
not  begin  to  establish  proof  until  he  has  set  these 
preliminaries  straight.  In  correcting  an  unfair 
analysis,  it  is  never  enough  that  one  merely  make 
objections  or  even  give  an  introduction  of  his  own ; 
he  must  briefly  —  and  often  a  single  sentence 
is  sufficient  —  show  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
audience  that  his  opponent  has  not  interpreted  the 
proposition  correctly.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the 
first  speaker  for  the  negative  considers  the  Intro- 
duction given  by  the  affirmative  perfectly  fair  and 
satisfactory,  he  can  pass  by  it  without  comment, 
and  begin  his  own  argumicnt  either  with  refutation 
or  with  a  statement  of  the  points  that  the  negative 
side  will  establish  in  attacking  the  proposition. 

It  is  thus  apparent  that  a  debater  who  opens  a 
negative  argument  must  depend  for  the  beginning 
of  his  speech  rather  on  a  thorough  understanding 
of  the  subject  In  all  its  details  and  fundamental 
principles  than  on  a  speech  that  he  has  to  de- 
liver word  for  word.  To  repeat  an  introduction  that 
has  already  been  given  is  absurd ;  to  fail  to  correct 
an  Introduction  that,  as  a  whole,  is  obscure  or  is  un- 
fair, is  to  merit  defeat.  It  may  be  added,  by 
way  of  caution,  that  when  a  debater  supplies 
245 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

any  deficiencies  in  the  speech  of  his  predecessor,  he 
should  do  this  without  any  appearance  of  "  smart- 
ness ''  or  personal  antagonism.  Even  if  the  affirm- 
ative debater  has  been  manifestly  unfair,  the  nega- 
tive speaker  will  do  well  to  correct  this  unfairness 
in  a  friendly,  though  in  a  forceful  manner. 

As  soon  as  the  introduction  is  out  of  the  way, 
the  negative  speaker  proceeds  to  the  discussion. 
Two  courses  are  open  to  him ;  he  may  at  once  re- 
fute his  predecessor's  arguments,  or  he  may  proceed 
to  take  up  his  constructive  proof,  giving  reason  for 
postponing  the  refutation.  As  this  matter  has  al- 
ready been  discussed,  it  is  only  necessary  to  say 
that  the  course  he  should  choose  depends  largely 
upon  the  strength  of  the  preceding  argument.  Most 
frequently,  perhaps,  the  first  negative  speaker  up- 
holds present  conditions,  and  depends  on  those  who 
follow  him  to  attack  the  plan  that  the  affirmative 
proposes.  The  same  directions  that  have  been  given 
to  the  affirmative  debater  for  connecting  his  work 
to  his  colleagues'  apply  equally  to  the  negative. 
Summaries  and  outlines  aid  greatly  in  binding  the 
arguments  of  a  debating  team  into  one  compact  mass. 

The  other  speakers.  About  the  only  practical 
suggestion  which  can  be  made  to  the  other  speak- 
ers is  that  they  adapt  their  constructive  work  to  that 
246 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

of  their  colleagues,  and  deploy  their  refutation  so 
as  to  hammer  the  principal  positions  of  their  op- 
ponents. Each  debater  may  or  may  not  begin  his 
speech  with  refutation,  but  he  should  always  begin 
his  main  argument  with  a  terse,  clear  summary  of 
what  has  been  said  on  his  side,  and  in  closing  he 
should  not  only  summarize  his  own  arguments,  but 
he  should  also  give  again,  in  very  brief  form,  the 
gist  of  what  has  been  proved  by  his  colleagues.  In 
addition,  any  speaker  except  the  last  one  on  each 
side,  may,  if  he  thinks  best,  give  an  outline  of  the 
argument  to  follow.  In  making  these  summaries, 
a  debater  must  always  avoid  stating  them  in  so 
bald  and  crude  a  form  as  to  make  them  monotonous 
and  offensive.  He  ought  rather  to  use  all  the  in- 
genuity at  his  command  in  an  attempt  to  make  this 
repetition  exceedingly  forceful. 

It  often  happens  than  an  inexperienced  debater 
never  reaches  his  conclusion.  While  he  is  still  in 
the  midst  of  his  proof,  his  allotment  of  time  expires, 
and  he  is  forced  to  sit  down,  leaving  his  speech 
hanging  in  the  air.  Such  an  experience  is  both  awk- 
ward and  disastrous ;  a  skilful  debater  never  allows 
it  to  happen.  The  peroration  is  the  most  important 
part  of  an  argument,  and  on  it  the  debater  should 
lavish  his  greatest  care.  To  omit  it  is  almost  the 
247 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

same  as  to  have  made  no  speech  at  all.  As  soon 
as  the  debater  perceives  that  he  has  but  a  short 
time  left,  he  should  at  once  bring  this  main  speech 
to  a  close,  and  even  though  he  may  have  to  omit 
important  ideas,  begin  at  once  on  his  conclusion. 
As  is  pointed  out  in  Chapter  X,  the  conclusion  con- 
sists both  of  a  summary  and  an  emotional  appeal. 
What  emotion  shall  be  aroused  and  how  it  shall 
apply  to  the  summarized  headings  can  largely  be 
determined  beforehand.  Some  debaters  go  so  far 
as  to  commit  this  conclusion  to  memory.  This  prac- 
tice is  not  recommended  except  in  special  cases, 
and  yet  a  debater  should  be  so  familiar  with  his 
peroration  that  he  will  have  no  difficulty  in  putting 
it  into  vigorous  and  pleasing  language. 

Rebuttal  speeches.  A  rebuttal  speech  usually 
furnishes  an  excellent  test  of  a  debater's  miastery  of 
his  subject.  It  shows  whether  or  not  he  compre- 
hends the  fundamental  principles  that  underly  the 
argument.  If  he  does  not  understand  fundamen- 
tals, he  cannot  distinguish  between  what  is  worth 
answering  and  what  is  trivial.  If  he  is  not  per- 
fectly familiar  with  the  arguments  on  both  sides  of 
the  question,  his  refutation  will  be  scattering;  that 
is,  he  will  rebut  only  a  few  of  his  opponent's  head- 
ings, those  for  which,  in  his  scanty  preparation, 
248 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

he  has  discovered  some  answer.  On  the  other 
hand,  if  he  really  understands  the  subject,  he  will 
deal  largely  with  main  ideas;  and  if  his  knowledge 
of  the  subject  is  as  extensive  as  it  should  be,  he  will 
almost  invariably  be  able  to  offer  some  opposition 
to  every  main  heading  used  by  his  opponents. 

When  a  debate  is  held  between  only  two  contest- 
ants, each  one  has  to  refute  the  whole  argument  of 
his  opponent.  In  this  case  there  are  no  complica- 
tions; but  when  two  teams  are  debating,  the  mem- 
bers of  each  must  decide  among  themselves  as  to 
how  the  rebuttal  shall  be  handled.  One  way  is  for 
each  member  to  refute  all  he  can,  working  inde- 
pendently of  his  colleagues.  Much  better  results 
are  secured,  however,  when  a  team  works  systemati- 
cally. In  the  first  place,  a  team  should  always  re- 
solve the  opposing  arguments  into  a  hasty  brief. 
The  main  points  of  the  opposition  can  then  be  as- 
signed for  rebuttal  to  the  various  members  of  the 
team,  and  each  debater  can  give  thorough  treatment 
to  his  assignment.  In  this  way  every  point  is  sure 
to  be  covered,  and  there  will  be  little,  if  any,  dupli- 
cation of  work. 

Such  a  course  presupposes  very  careful  prepara- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  debaters.  It  means  that 
each  member  of  the  team  must  have  sufficient  knowl- 
249 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

edge  and  material  at  his  command  to  oppose  with 
credit  any  argument  that  may  be  advanced.  In 
general,  the  assignment  of  headings  for  rebuttal  may 
be  such  that  each  debater  will  refute  those  points 
of  w^hich  he  took  an  opposite  view^  in  his  main 
speech,  but  as  it  is  usually  desirable  to  rebut  argu- 
ments in  the  same  order  in  which  they  were  origi- 
nally given,  no  member  of  the  team  can  afford  to 
shirk  mastering  each  detail  that  in  any  way  has  a 
vital  bearing  upon  the  proposition. 

The  last  rebuttal  speaker.  The  work  of  the 
last  speaker  on  each  side  differs  somewhat  from 
the  work  of  his  colleagues.  All  the  speakers  try 
to  overthrow  the  opposing  arguments,  and  by  means 
of  summaries  keep  their  case  as  a  whole  before  the 
audience.  The  last  speaker  devotes  far  less  time  to 
pure  refutation,  gives  a  more  detailed  summary,  and, 
in  addition,  compares  and  contrasts  the  arguments 
of  his  side  with  the  arguments  of  the  opposition. 
This  last  process  is  called  ''  amplifying  and  dimin- 
ishing." 

It  is  not  alw^ays  necessary  to  prove  a  main  head- 
ing false  in  order  to  destroy  its  effectiveness.  A 
debater  may  of  necessity  have  to  admit  that  the  op- 
position has  successfully  established  the  points  it 
set  out  to  prove.  In  such  a  case,  he  cannot  do  bet- 
250 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

ter  than  to  acknowledge  the  correctness  of  his  op- 
ponent's proof,  and  then  remembering  that  an  au- 
dience awards  a  decision  by  a  comparison  of  the 
relative  weight  of  the  proof  of  each  side,  amplify 
the  importance  of  his  own  arguments,  point  by 
point,  and  diminish  the  importance  of  the  argu- 
ments advanced  by  the  other  side. 

For  instance,  in  a  debate  on  the  question  as  to 
whether  immigration  should  be  restricted,  the 
affirmative  might  maintain  that  unrestricted  immi- 
gration brings  serious  political  evils,  and  the  neg- 
ative might  show  that  the  policy  of  nonrestriction 
greatly  increases  the  wealth  of  the  country\  If 
neither  of  these  contentions  be  successfully  refuted, 
the  favor  of  the  audience  will  incline  towards  the 
affirmative  or  the  negative,  as  far  as  those  two 
points  are  concerned,  according  as  they  think  that 
political  purity  or  economic  prosperity  is  the  more 
important.  Plainly,  it  would  be  for  the  interest  of 
the  affirmative  to  convince  the  audience  that  the 
preservation  of  political  integrity  is  of  greater  mo- 
ment than  any  mere  material  gain. 

In  many  respects  the  last  rebuttal  speeches  on 

each  side  are  the  most  conspicuous  and  decisive 

parts  of  a  debate.     If  the  last  speech  is  hesitating 

and  weak,  it  is  liable  to  ruin  all  preceding  efforts, 

251 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

even  though  they  were  of  the  highest  order ;  If  it  is 
enthusiastic  and  strong,  it  will  often  cover  up  pre- 
ceding defects,  and  turn  defeat  into  victory.  Be- 
cause of  its  importance  this  portion  of  the  work 
usually  falls  to  the  best  debater  on  the  team,  and 
if  he  is  wise  he  will  give  it  his  greatest  thought  and 
care.  In  this  speech  he  should  strive  in  every  pos- 
sible way  to  attain  perfection.  His  delivery,  should 
be  emphatic  and  pleasing;  his  ideas  should  be  logi- 
cally arranged;  and  his  knowledge  of  what  he  has 
to  say  should  be  so  complete  that  there  will  be  no 
hesitation,  no  groping  for  words.  Furthermore,  he 
should  introduce  an  element  of  persuasion;  to  reach 
both  the  minds  and  the  hearts  of  his  hearers  is  es- 
sential for  the  greatest  success.  All  this  has  to  be 
done  in  a  short  time,  yet  to  be  of  a  high  rank 
even  the  shortest  closing  speeches  must  contain 
these  characteristics. 

SPECIAL  FEATURES  OF  DEBATE 

An  argument,  like  other  kinds  of  composition, 
should  possess  the  qualities  of  style  known  as  Clear- 
ness, Force,  and  Elegance,  and  should  in  all  respects 
observe  the  principles  of  Unity,  Selection,  Coher- 
ence, Proportion,  Emphasis,  and  Variety.  Since 
252 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

the  student  from  his  study  of  Rhetoric  is  already 
famiUar  with  these  matters,  it  would  be  superfluous 
to  dwell  upon  them  in  this  book.  A  good  written 
argument,  however,  does  not  always  make  a  good 
debate;  limited  time  for  speaking,  lack  of  oppor- 
tunity for  the  audience  to  grasp  ideas  and  to  re- 
flect upon  them,  the  presence  of  strong  opposing  ar- 
guments that  must  be  met  and  overthrown  with  still 
stronger  arguments, —  these  conditions  render  the 
heightening  of  certain  characteristics  indispensable 
in  a  debate. 

Above  all  else  the  successful  debater  is  forceful. 
He  uses  every  possible  device  for  driving  home  his 
arguments.  He  bends  every  effort  toward  making 
his  ideas  so  plain  and  so  emphatic  that  the  audi- 
ence will  understand  them  and  remember  them. 
Realizing  that  the  audience  cannot,  like  the  reader 
of  a  written  article,  peruse  the  argument  a  second 
time,  he  uses  w^ords  and  expressions  that  cause  his 
thoughts  to  stick  fast  wherever  they  fall. 

Statistics.  Statistics  improperly  used  are  dry 
and  uninteresting;  they  often  spoil  an  otherwise 
forceful  and  persuasive  debate.  The  trouble  often 
lies,  strange  to  say,  in  the  accuracy  with  which 
the  figures  are  given.  A  brain  that  is  already  do- 
ing its  utmost  to  accept  almost  instantaneously  a 
253 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

multitude  of  facts  and  comprehend  their  signifi- 
cance, or  a  brain  that  is  somewhat  sluggish  and 
lazy,  refuses  to  be  burdened  with  uninteresting 
and  unimportant  details.  For  this  reason,  when  a 
debater  speaks  of  10,564,792  people,  the  brain  be- 
comes wearied  with  the  numbers  and  in  disgust  is 
apt  to  turn  away  from  the  whole  matter.  On  the 
other  hand,  the  round  sum  of  10,000,000  not  only 
does  not  burden  the  brain,  but  also,  under  ordinary 
conditions,  gives  in  a  rather  forceful  manner  the  in- 
formation it  was  intended  to  convey.  "  About  five 
hundred  "  presents  a  much  more  vivid  picture  than 
"  four  hundred  and  eighty-six  "  or  "  five  hundred 
and  eighteen  " ;  "  fifteen  per  cent."  is  stronger  than 
"  fifteen  and  one-tenth  per  cent." ;  the  expression 
*'  eighty  years  "  seems  to  indicate  a  longer  period  of 
time  than  "  eighty-two  years,  seven  months,  and 
twenty-nine  days." 

If  one  is  to  quote  statistics,  he  should  always,  un- 
less the  circumstances  be  very  unusual,  use  round 
numbers.  Figures  themselves,  however,  are  often 
less  emphatic  than  other  methods  of  expression. 
The  ordinary  mind  cannot  grasp  the  significance 
of  large  numbers.  As  a  rule  it  is  well  for  the  arguer 
to  seek  out  some  standard  that  can  at  least  partially 
be  understood.  The  mere  statement  that  the  Penn- 
254 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

sylvania  Railroad  spent  half  a  billion  dollars  in  ten 
years  leaves  little  impression.  The  following  quota- 
tion, however,  reinforces  the  plain  fact  with  a  vivid 
comparison : 

Do  you  realize  that  in  the  ten  years  of  Cassat's  presi- 
dency the  Pennsyh-ania  Railroad  spent  half  a  billion  dol- 
lars? There  is  not  a  transcontinental  railroad  in  the 
United  States,  yet  two  railroads  could  have  been  built  from 
New  York  to  San  Francisco  for  less  than  this  sum.  We 
are  accustomed  to  thinking  of  the  Panama  Canal,  a  lock 
canal  by  the  way,  as  the  greatest  feat  of  all  times,  a  project 
that  only  a  nation  of  limitless  genius  and  resources  could 
undertake,  yet  the  Pennsylvania  could  have  built  a  sea- 
level  canal  for  less  than  this  half  billion. 

To  give  the  exact  number  of  square  miles  in 
Korea  would  mean  little  to  the  average  person ;  he 
neither  remembers  the  area  of  other  countries  nor 
can  he  easily  realize  what  the  figures  represent. 
However,  the  statement  that  Korea  is  nearly  as  large 
as  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  combined  may  give  a 
vivid  and  fairly  accurate  impression. 

Hardly  any  one  would  be  particularly  interested 
in  the  number  of  barrels  of  cem.ent  used  in  the  con- 
struction of  the  Panama  Canal.  But  the  infonnation 
that  there  is  enough  cement  in  the  Gatum  Locks  to 
build  a  wall  eight  feet  thick  and  twelve  feet  high 
around  the  entire  State  of  Delaware  is  impressive. 

The  officials  of  the  forestry  service,  in  speaking 
255 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

of  the  great  devastation  caused  by  forest  fires,  make 
the  startHng  assertion  that  a  new  navy  of  first-class 
battleships  could  be  built  for  the  sum  lost  during  a 
few  weeks  in  the  fires  that  raged  from  the  pines  of 
Maine  to  the  redwoods  of  CaHfornia. 

Figures  used  in  this  way  are  most  efifective,  and 
yet  probably  nothing  in  argumentation  is  more 
tedious  than  too  many  of  these  descriptions  of  statis- 
tics coming  close  together.  If  numbers  absolutely 
have  to  be  indicated  a  great  many  times,  even  figures 
are  likely  to  be  less  tiresome.  Some  debaters  have 
found  it  useful  to  present  statistics  on  charts  large 
enough  to  be  seen  by  the  audience. 

Concreteness.  General  statements  and  abstract 
principles  invariably  weary  an  audience.  Theories 
and  generalities  are  usually  too  intangible  tO'  make 
much  impression.  Specific  instances  and  concrete 
cases,  however,  are  usually  interesting.  A  vivid 
picture  of  real  persons,  things,  and  events  is  neces- 
sary to  arouse  the  attention  of  an  audience  and  cause 
them  both  to  understand  the  argument  and  to  give 
it  their  consideration.  The  slogan  of  a  recent  po- 
litical campaign  was  not,  ''  Improved  economic  con- 
ditions for  the  laboring  man  " ;  it  was,  ''  The  full 
dinner  pail."  The  political  orator  who  is  urging 
the  necessity  for  a  larger  navy  on  the  ground  that 
256 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

war  is  Imminent  does  not  speak  of  possible  antag- 
onists in  such  general  terms  as  foreign  pozvers;  he 
specifies  Germany,  Japan,  and  the  other  nations  that 
he  fears.  The  preacher  who  would  really  awaken 
the  conscience  of  his  church  does  not  confine  him- 
self to  such  terms  as  original  sin  and  zveaknesses  of 
the  flesh;  he  talks  of  lying,  stealing,  and  szvearing. 
Compare  the  effectiveness  of  the  following  ex- 
amples : 


Stock-raising  on  a 
large  scale  is  being  sup- 
planted by  general  farm- 
ing. 

Children  cannot  re- 
ceive as  good  an  educa- 
tion in  the  country  as  in 
the  town. 

Scientific  research  suf- 
fered sore  bereavement 
in  the  European  War. 


Scientific  management 


The  man  with  the 
lariat  has  given  way  to 
the  man  with  the  hoe. 

The  little  red  school- 
house  at  Danbury  Cor- 
ners cannot  compete  with 
the  graded  schools  of  the 
capitol  city. 

Dr.  Bertheim,  the 
greatest  recent  authority 
on  organic  arsenic  com- 
pounds, was  one  of  the 
first  German  soldiers  to 
fall. 

John  Smith,  efficiency 


257 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

has  been  substituted  for      expert,  rules  the  Groton 
the   old-fashioned,   hap-      Mills  with  a  stop  watch, 
hazard  methods  of  manu- 
facturing, 

By  citing  the  opinions  of  earlier  statesmen.  Sen- 
ator Hoar,  in  the  following  quotation,  opposes  the 
proposal  that  the  United  States  should  retain  the 
Philippine  Islands.  He  does  this  not  in  vague,  gen- 
eral terms ;  he  refers  to  the  forefathers  specifically : 

I  have  sometimes  fancied  that  the  question  before  us 
now  might  be  decided  not  alone  by  the  votes  of  us  who  sit 
here  to-day,  but  by  the  votes  of  the  great  men  who  have 
been  our  predecessors  in  this  Chamber  and  in  the  Conti- 
nental Congress  from  the  beginning  of  the  Republic. 

Would  that  that  roll  might  be  called.  The  solemn  as- 
sembly sits  silent  while  the  Chair  puts  the  question  whose 
answer  is  so  fraught  with  the  hopes  of  liberty  and  the 
destiny  of  the  Republic. 

The  roll  is  called.  George  Washington :  "  No.  Why 
should  we  quit  our  own,  to  stand  on  foreign  ground  ?  " 

Alexander  Hamilton:  "No.  The  Declaration  of  In- 
dependence is  the  fundamental  constitution  of  every  State." 

Thomas  Jefferson :  "  No.  Governments  are  instituted 
among  men  deriving  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of 
the  governed.  Every  people  ought  to  have  that  separate 
and  equal  station  among  the  nations  of  the  world  to  which 
the  laws  of  nature  and  of  nature's  God  entitle  them." 

John  Adams :     "  No.    I  stood  by  the  side  of  Jefferson 
when  he  brought  in  the  Declaration;  I  was  its  champion 
on  the  floor  of  Congress.    After  our  long  estrangement,  I 
come  back  to  his  side  again." 
258 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

James  Madison:  "No.  The  object  of  the  Federal  Con- 
stitution is  to  secure  the  union  of  the  thirteen  primitive 
States,  which  we  know  to  be  practicable,  and  to  add  to 
them  such  other  States  as  may  arise  in  their  own  bosoms 
or  in  their  neighborhood,  which  v/e  cannot  doubt  will  be 
practicable." 

Thomas  Corwin:  "No.  I  said  in  the  days  of  the 
Mexican  war:  *  If  I  were  a  Mexican,  as  I  am  an  Amer- 
ican, I  would  welcome  you  with  bloody  hands  to  hospitable 
graves ; '  and  Ohio  to-day  honors  and  loves  me  for  that 
utterance  beyond  all  her  other  sons."  i 

Figures  of  speech.  The  use  of  figurative  lan- 
guage is  also  an  aid  to  clearness  and  to  force. 
Simile,  metaphor,  personification,  antithesis,  balance, 
climax,  rhetorical  question,  and  repetition  are  all 
effective  aids  in  the  presentation  of  argument.  The 
speeches  of  great  orators  are  replete  with  expres- 
sions of  this  sort.  Burke,  in  his  Speech  on  Concili- 
ation, says,  "  Despotism  itself  is  obliged  to  truck  and 
huckster  " ;  "  The  public,"  he  said,  "  would  not  have 
patience  to  see  us  play  the  game  out  with  our  ad- 
versaries ;  we  must  produce  our  hand  " ;  "  Men  may 
lose  little  in  property  by  the  act  which  takes  away 
all  their  freedom.  When  a  man  is  robbed  of  a 
trifle  on  the  highway,  it  is  not  the  twopence  lost 
that  constitutes  the  capital  outrage."  In  speaking 
of  certain  provisions  of  the  Constitution,  Webster 

1  United  States  Senate,  April  17,  igoo. 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

says  that  they  are  the  "  keystone  of  the  arch/'  In 
the  following  paragraph  Henry  Ward  Beecher  uses 
highly  figurative  language  in  referring  to  the 
American  flag: 

The  stars  upon  it  were  to  the  pining  nations  like  the 
bright  morning  stars  of  God,  and  the  stripes  upon  it  were 
beams  of  morning  light.  As  at  early  dawn  the  stars  shine 
forth  even  while  it  grows  light,  and  then  as  the  sun  ad- 
vances that  light  breaks  into  banks  and  streaming  lines  of 
color,  the  glowing  red  and  intense  white  striving  together, 
and  ribbing  the  horizon  with  bars  effulgent,  so,  on  the 
American  flag,  stars  and  beams  of  many-colored  light  shine 
out  together.  And  wherever  this  flag  comes,  and  men  be- 
hold it,  they  see  in  its  sacred  emblazonry  no  ramping  lion, 
and  no  fierce  eagle;  no  embattled  castles,  or  insignia  of  im- 
perial authority;  they  see  tlie  symbols  of  light. 

The  following  quotation  is  taken  from  one  of  the 
best  known  speeches  of  recent  years: 

Having  behind  us  the  producing  masses  of  this  nation 
and  the  world,  supported  by  the  commercial  interests,  the 
laboring  interests  and  the  toilers  everywhere,  we  will  an- 
swer their  demand  for  a  gold  standard  by  saying  to  them : 
You  shall  not  press  down  upon  the  brow  of  labor  this 
crown  of  thorns,  you  shall  not  crucify  mankind  upon  the 
cross  of  gold.2 

Sometimes  figures  of  speech  are  used  to  such  ex- 
cess or  in  such  incongruous  combinations  that  they 
detract    from   the   effectiveness   of   the   debate   in 

2  William  J.  Bryan,  Democratic  National  Convention,  1896. 
260 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

which  they  occur  rather  than  add  to  it.  The  dis- 
tance from  a  forceful  figure  to  an  absurd  figure  is 
so  short  that  a  debater  has  to  be  on  his  guard 
against  using  expressions  that  will  impress  his  audi- 
ence as  ridiculous  or  even  funny.  A  mixture  of 
highly  figurative  language  with  literal  language  and 
commonplace  ideas,  and  a  mixture  of  several  fig- 
ures are  especially  to  be  guarded  against. 


DELIVERY 

To  be  a  successful  debater  one  must  understand 
how  to  talk  and  how  to  act  in  the  presence  of  an 
audience.  Uncouthness  in  appearance  and  awk- 
wardness in  speech  have  often  brought  defeat. 
Moreover,  it  is  not  enough  that  a  debater  refrain 
from  ofifending  his  audience;  his  bearing  and  his 
voice  should  be  of  positive  assistance  to  him  both 
in  pleasing  them  and  in  interpreting  to  them  the 
ideas  that  he  wishes  to  convey.  First  of  all,  a 
good  delivery  is  one  that  assists  in  making  the  ar- 
gument clear.  Its  next  most  important  function  is 
to  make  the  argument  forceful.  A  speaker  should 
never  rest  content  with  being  able  to  present  his  ar- 
gument merely  with  clearness;  he  should  strive  to 
be  interesting  and  impressive  also.  These  qualities 
261 


Debate— Some  Practical  Suggestions 

depend  in  no  small  measure  upon  the  way  a  speech 
is  delivered.  The  best  story  or  the  best  argument 
will  fall  flat  unless  it  is  full  of  the  fire  of  enthusi- 
asm, unless  the  personality  of  the  speaker  vivifies 
it  and  makes  it  a  living  reality.  Unfortunately, 
this  intangible  quality  in  a  speaker,  often  called 
"  personality "  or  "  magnetism,"  cannot,  to  any 
great  extent,  be  taught.  In  the  main,  one  must  seek 
this  and  develop  it  for  him.self.  A  text-book  can 
point  out  what  constitutes  good  form,  what  is 
pleasing  and  impressive  to  the  eye  and  to  the  ear, 
and,  in  a  word,  what  make  up  the  externals  of  a 
good  delivery;  but  beyond  these  mechanical  direc- 
tions it  cannot  go.  A  student  should  observ^e  the 
following  fundamental  directions  as  his  first  step 
toward  becoming  a  successful  speaker.  After- 
wards, he  should  cultivate  earnestness,  enthusiasm, 
perception,  a  gense  of  humor,  and  all  other  such 
qualities  as  go  to  make  up  a  really  great  speaker. 
Position,  The  best  position  for  a  debater  to  take 
on  the  stage  is  in  the  center  well  toward  the  front. 
He  should  take  the  center  because  in  that  position 
he  can  best  see  the  entire  audience,  and  the  entire 
audience  can  best  see  him.  He  should  stand  near 
the  front  edge  of  the  platfomi  for  several  reasons: 
first,  he  can  make  himself  more  easily  understood ; 
262 


Debate— Some  Practical  Suggestions 

his  voice  need  not  be  so  loud  in  order  to  be  heard 
distinctly  in  every  part  of  the  hall.  This  is  no 
small  advantage  for  one  who  is  not  gifted  with 
unusual  powers  of  speech.  In  the  next  place,  if  a 
debater  stands  close  to  his  audience,  he  can  adopt 
a  more  conversational  style  of  delivery.  He  can 
establish  a  direct  personal  connection  between  him- 
self and  his  hearers  and  talk  to  them  as  man  to 
man.  If  the  hall  is  not  too-  large,  he  need  scarcely 
raise  his  voice  from  its  accustomed  tone;  he  can 
look  his  audience  in  the  eye,  receiving  the  stimulus 
of  whatever  interest  they  express ;  and  at  the  same 
time  he  can  let  them  see  in  his  features  the  earnest- 
ness and  sincerity  that  he  feels.  To  stand  near  the 
back  of  the  stage  is  undoubtedly  easier  for  one 
who  is  diffident  or  inexperienced;  perhaps  he  will 
then  be  able  partially  to  forget  where  he  is  and  to 
imagine  that  he  is  alone ;  but  such  an  attitude  both 
severs  all  personal  connection  betvv^een  speaker  and 
hearer,  and  shows  that  the  debater  does  not  trust 
himself,  that  he  has  no  great  belief  in  his  subject, 
and  that  he  fears  his  audience.  An  impression  of 
this  sort  is  a  great  handicap  even  to  the  strongest 
case.  If  one  would  inspire  confidence,  he  must 
appear  confident;  if  one  would  make  friends,  he 
must  be  friendly,  avoiding  even  a  suggestion  of 
263 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

aloofness.  To  accomplish  these  purposes  as  far  as 
is  possible  by  action,  a  debater  should  come  close 
to  his  audience,  having  every  appearance  of  being 
glad  that  he  is  to  speak  and  confident  in  the 
strength  of  the  side  that  he  is  to  uphold. 

The  next  thing  for  a  speaker  to  learn  is  how  to 
stand.  He  should  not  take  a  natural  posture,  as 
some  writers  say,  tmless  that  posture  is  one  of 
strength  and,  to  some  degree,  of  grace.  A  student 
without  training  will  usually  stand  with  his  head 
protruding  forward,  his  shoulders  drooping,  his 
body  twisted,  and  his  feet  far  apart,  with  all  his 
weight  on  one  leg.  Such  an  attitude  is  enough  to 
condemn  one  even  before  he  begins  to  speak.  A 
slipshod  appearance  suggests  slipshod  thinking  and 
reasoning.  A  speaker  should  always  stand  erect, 
with  his  head  back,  chin  in,  shoulders  rolled  back 
and  down ;  either  the  feet  should  be  near  together 
with  the  weight  of  the  body  on  both,  or  one  foot 
should  be  slightly  in  advance  of  the  other  with  the 
weight  of  the  body  entirely  on  the  rear  foot.  In  the 
latter  case,  the  leg  on  which  the  body  rests  must 
form  a  straight  line  with  the  body,  there  being  no 
unsightly  bulging  at  the  hip;  and  the  leg  on  which 
the  body  does  not  rest  must  be  slightly  bent  at  the 
knee.  This  posture  is  not  difficult  to  attain  if  one 
264 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

will  practise  it  frequently,  endeavoring  in  his  every- 
day life  to  walk  and  stand  in  a  soldierly  manner. 
On  the  other  hand,  erectness  should  not  be  carried 
to  such  an  extreme  as  to  become  stiffness.  A  de- 
bater's object  is  to  be  forceful  and  pleasing.  In 
striving  for  this  end,  he  should  always  remember 
that  he  can  very  easily  err  in  either  of  two  direc- 
tions. 

A  debater  should  allow  his  hands,  for  the  most 
part,  to  hang  naturally  at  his  sides.  There  may  be 
a  great  temptation  for  him  to  put  them  in  his 
pockets,  but  he  should  resist  this  for  two  reasons: 
such  a  procedure  is  not  considered  good  form,  and 
his  hands  are  less  available  for  instant  use  in  the 
making  of  gestures.  If  one  is  delivering  a  lengthy 
argument,  there  is  no  particular  harm  in  putting 
one  hand  behind  the  back  for  a  short  time,  or  even 
in  front  of  the  body  along  the  waist  line,  provided 
this  can  be  done  in  an  easy,  natural  manner;  but 
in  the  case  of  a  short  speech,  one  will  do  well  to 
keep  his  hands  at  his  sides.  They  must  hang  nat- 
urally in  order  not  to  attract  attention,  being 
neither  closed  tightly  nor  held  rigidly  open.  If  one 
will  follow  these  directions,  his  hands  and  arms 
may  feel  awkward,  but  they  will  not  appear  so. 

Another  important  principle  in  the  matter  of  po- 

265 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

sition  requires  that  a  debater  shall  keep  his  eyes 
fixed  on  his  audience.  He  must  not  look  at  the 
floor,  at  the  ceiling,  or  at  the  walls.  He  must  look 
at  the  people  he  would  convince.  Only  in  this  way 
can  he  hope  to  hold  their  attention.  Only  in  this 
way  can  he  win  their  confidence  and  reach  their 
feelings.  To  look  into  space  means  to  debate  into 
space. 

In  the  next  place,  a  speaker  must  beware  of  fall- 
ing into  ludicrous  and  disgusting  habits  of  deport- 
ment. Nervousness  will  often  cause  one  in  the 
presence  of  an  audience  to  keep  making  an  un- 
sightly gesture,  a  peculiar  twitch  or  step  that  will 
absolutely  ruin  his  whole  speech.  Some  speakers 
have  been  known  to  change  their  weight  from  one 
foot  to  the  other  as  often  as  twenty  or  thirty  times 
a  minute.  Other  speakers  have  adopted  a  peculiar 
jerk  of  the  head  or  a  constant  shrugging  of  the 
shoulders  that  is  most  disagreeable  to  see.  Still 
others  keep  constantly  opening  and  shutting  their 
hands.  For  years  one  speaker  of  some  small  prom- 
inence spent  the  greater  part  of  his  time  while  on 
the  platform  in  tugging  at  his  coat,  apparently  in  an 
effort  to  make  it  fit  better  around  the  collar.  All 
such  actions  as  these  are  to  be  carefully  guarded 


266 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

A  debater,  however,  is  not  expected  to  stand  per- 
fectly still :  he  should  use  considerable  interpreta- 
tive and  emphatic  action.  To  begin  with,  he  ought 
not  to  stand  all  the  time  in  exactly  the  same  spot. 
Monotony  of  position  is  to  be  avoided  as  well  as 
monotony  of  action  or  of  voice.  He  will  rest  him- 
self and  his  audience  if  he  will  occasionally  move 
about,  taking  two  or  three  steps  at  a  time.  In 
doing  this  he  must  never  go  backward;  he  must 
never  retreat.  If,  for  any  reason,  he  began  his 
speech  while  standing  near  the  rear  or  the  center 
of  the  stage,  he  should  move  forward ;  if  he  cannot 
go  foi-ward,  he  may  move  back  and  forth  near  the 
edge  of  the  platform.  The  best  time  for  one  to 
change  his  position  is  at  the  conclusion  of  a  para- 
graph. A  paragraph  division,  it  will  be  remem- 
bered, indicates  a  change  in  thought.  If  a  debater, 
therefore,  makes  a  longer  pause  than  usual  at  this 
point,  and  in  addition  alters  his  position  slightly, 
he  helps  interpret  his  argument.  He  does  for  the 
hearer  exactly  what  indentation  does  for  the  reader. 

Gestures.  So  much  has  been  said  and  written 
about  gestures  that  a  student  is  often  puzzled  to 
know  whose  advice  to  follow  and  what  to  do. 
Some  writers  say  that  no  gestures  at  all  are  desir- 
able; others  deem  them  necessary,  but  declare  that 
267 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

they  should  never  be  made  unless  they  are  spon- 
taneous and  natural.  In  the  light  of  such  conflict- 
ing advice,  what  will  determine  the  proper  course 
for  a  student  to  follow?  The  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion lies  in  a  consideration  of  the  ultimate  object 
of  a  course  in  debating.  If  it  is  to  give  students 
some  facility  in  expressing  their  thoughts  before  an 
audience,  if  it  is  to  train  students  for  practical 
work  in  business  and  professional  life,  then  those 
men  who  are  recognized  as  the  polished  and  pov/er- 
ful  speakers  of  the  day  should  be  taken  as  models. 
Most  of  these,  it  will  be  found,  use  gestures. 
There  is  but  one  reasonable  course,  then,  for  the 
student  to  follow :  he  should  make  gestures.  They 
may  be  crude  and  awkward  at  first,  but  only  by 
practice  can  he  ever  hope  to  improve  them. 

The  best  method  of  procedure,  undoubtedly,  is 
for  the  beginner  to  become  familiar  with  two  or 
three  of  the  most  common  gestures,  learning  how 
to  make  them  and  just  what  they  signify.  He 
should  then  use  them.  They  may  seem  mechanical 
and  ungainly  at  first,  but  constant  practice  both  in 
private  and  before  a  class  will  soon  enable  him  to 
make  them  with  considerable  emphasis  and  ease. 
From  this  point  on,  the  road  is  clear.  The  knowl- 
edge that  he  can  use  his  hands  to  good  advantage, 
268 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

even  in  a  limited  way,  will  soon  cause  him  to  make 
gestures  spontaneously.  Nor  will  he  be  limited  to 
the  few  with  which  he  started.  In  the  midst  of 
an  explanation  and  in  the  heat  of  an  impassioned 
plea,  he  will  find  himself  using  gestures  that  he 
had  not  thought  of  before.  The  awkward  and  pre- 
meditated gesture  with  which  he  began  will  have 
become  forceful  and  spontaneous. 

The  gestures  that  a  student  should  first  learn  to 
use  must  be  illustrated  to  him  by  his  instructor. 
To  see  a  gesture  made  several  times  gives  one  a 
better  idea  of  how  to  make  it  and  of  what  it  means 
than  could  a  dozen  pages  in  a  text-book.  The 
choice  of  gestures,  too,  may  rest  with  the  instructor. 
It  makes  no  particular  difference  with  what  ones  a 
debater  begins,  provided  that  they  are  simple  in 
execution  and  are  such  as  he  will  wish  to  use  in 
practically  every  debate  into  which  he  enters.  Or- 
dinarily, the  best  ones  for  a  beginner  to  practise  on 
are  those  indicating  emphasis.  If  he  wishes  for  a 
wider  field,  he  might  also  try  to  use  gestures  indi- 
cating magnitude  and  contrast.  When  he  has  fin- 
ished with  these,  he  should  hesitate  before  delib- 
erately introducing  many  others.  A  debate  is  not 
a  dramatic  production,  and  it  should  in  no  wise 
savor  of  melodrama. 

269 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

Voice.  Correct  position  and  forceful  gestures 
are  very  important,  but  upon  no  one  thing  does  the 
success  of  a  debater,  aside  from  his  argument,  de- 
pend so  much  as  upon  his  voice.  One  may  move 
his  audience  in  spite  of  an  awlcward  posture  and 
in  the  absence  of  all  intelligent  gestures,  but  unless 
his  voice  meets  certain  requirements,  his  case  is  al- 
most hopeless.  Above  all  else  a  speaker's  voice 
must  be  distinct. 

Distinctness  depends  upon  several  things.  First, 
the  voice  must  be  loud  enough  to  be  heard  without 
difficulty  in  every  part  of  the  room.  To  produce 
this  result,  one  should  speak  especially  to  those  in 
the  rear,  carefully  watching  to  see  whether  he  holds 
their  attention ;  at  the  same  time  he  must  be  careful 
not  to  shout  in  a  manner  unpleasant  to  those  sitting 
nearer  him.  The  stress  laid  by  public  speakers 
upon  the  matter  of  loudness  is  well  illustrated  by 
a  story  told  of  one  of  the  foremost  orators  of  the 
day.  It  is  said  that  he  invariably  stations  some 
one  in  the  back  of  the  audience  to  signal  to  him 
when  his  voice  is  either  too  low  or  unnecessarily 
loud. 

In  the  next  place,  distinctness  depends  upon 
enunciation.  The  debater  who  drops  off  final  sylla- 
bles, slurs  consonants,  runs  words  together,  or 
270 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

talks  without  using  his  lips  and  without  opening  his 
mouth  is  hard  to  understand.  It  often  requires 
considerable  conscious  effort  to  pronounce  each 
syllable  in  a  word  distinctly,  but  the  resulting  clear- 
ness is  worth  a  strenuous  attempt.  One  great 
cause  of  poor  enunciation  is  too  rapid  talking.  A 
fairly  slow  delivery  is  preferable  not  only  because 
the  words  can  be  more  easily  understood,  but  also 
because  it  gives  a  debater  the  appearance  of  being 
more  careful  and  accurate  in  his  reasoning.  Great 
rapidity  in  speech  may  be  due  to  nervousness  or 
inexperience;  whatever  its  cause,  it  is  usually  fatal 
to  distinctness. 

A  pleasing  tone  of  voice  is  not  of  so  great  mo- 
ment as  distinctness  of  utterance,  yet  its  cultivation 
is  by  no  means  to  be  neglected.  Harsh,  rasping 
sounds  and  nasal  twangs  are  disagreeable  to  hear, 
and  no  speaker  can  afford  to  offend  his  audience 
in  this  way.  An  unpleasant  voice  may  be  the  re- 
sult of  some  physical  defect;  more  often  it  is 
caused  by  sheer  carelessness.  In  most  cases  a  little 
practice  will  produce  a  wonderful  change.  A  very 
common  breach  of  elegance  in  speaking  is  the  habit 
of  drawling  out  an  er  sound  between  words.  The 
constant  repetition  of  this  is  exceedingly  annoying. 
It  is  usually  caused  by  an  attempt  to  fill  in  a  gap 
271 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

while  the  speaker  is  groping  about  for  the  next 
word.  The  best  way  to  correct  this  blunder  is  to 
be  so  familiar  with  what  one  is  going  to  say  that 
there  will  be  no  gap  to  fill  in ;  but  in  case  one  does 
have  to  hunt  for  words,  it  is  a  thousand  times 
preferable  to  leave  the  gap  unfilled.  Each  word 
should  stand  out  by  itself,  even  though  there  is  a 
pause  of  many  seconds.  To  offend  the  ears  of  an 
audience  with  a  crude  tone  of  voice  or  with  mean- 
ingless sounds  is  a  bad  violation  of  propriety. 

The  first  step  to  be  taken  in  the  cultivation  of  a 
distinct  and  pleasing  voice  is  to  acquire  the  habit  of 
standing  correctly.  Under  the  subject  of  position 
it  was  stated  that  the  body  should  be  kept  erect,  the 
head  thrown  back,  and  the  shoulders  rolled  back 
and  down.  This  posture  is  the  best  not  only  be- 
cause it  is  the  most  graceful  but  because  it  gives  the 
speaker  the  greatest  command  of  his  vocal  organs. 
Stooping  shoulders  and  a  bowed  trunk  contract  the 
lungs  and  diminish  the  supply  of  breath,  and  a  bent 
neck  renders  the  cords  of  the  neck  less  controllable. 
After  taking  the  proper  position,  one  should  next 
endeavor  to  breathe  as  deeply  as  he  can.  The 
louder  he  has  to  speak,  the  deeper  should  be  his 
breathing.  Remembering  that  he  does  not  wish  to 
talk  fast,  he  will  do  well  to  fill  his  lungs  at  the 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

close  of  each  sentence,  always  inhaling,  in  order 
not  to  make  an  unpleasant  gasping  noise,  through 
the  nose.  While  speaking,  he  should  control  his 
supply  of  breath  not  by  contracting  the  chest  but  by 
elevating  the  diaphragm.  This  procedure  will  give 
his  voice  a  richness  and  a  resonance  that  it  other- 
wise could  not  have.  Breathing  merely  from  the 
top  of  the  lungs  means  squeakiness  of  tone  and  poor 
control.  One  who  breathes  incorrectly  will  find  it 
necessary  to  shout  to  make  himself  heard  at  a  dis- 
tance; one  who  breathes  correctly  can  usually  be 
heard  under  the  same  conditions  by  merely  talking. 
The  superiority  of  the  round,  deep  tone  over  the 
shout  is  too  obvious  to  need  comment. 

In  the  next  place,  a  speaker  must  think  about  this 
voice.  Thought  and  study  are  as  essential  in  the 
training  of  a  voice  as  in  the  mastery  of  any  art.  A 
natural  voice  is  not  usually  pleasing;  it  becomes  so 
only  through  cultivation.  Much  of  this  training  can 
be  done  by  the  speaker  unaided.  Few  people  are 
so  insensible  to  qualities  of  sound  that  they  cannot 
detect  harshness  and  impurities  even  in  their  own 
utterance,  provided  that  they  will  give  the  matter 
their  attention.  It  is  not  enough,  however,  for  one 
to  watch  his  voice  only  while  he  is  debating  or 
while  he  is  repeating  his  arguments  in  preparation 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

for  a  debate;  he  must  carry  constant  watchfulness 
even  into  his  daily  conversation.  The  services  of 
a  good  instructor  are  invaluable,  but  at  best  they 
can  be  only  auxiliary.  All  improvement  must 
come  through  the  efforts  of  the  speaker  himself. 

Attitude  toward  opponents.  If  one  will  bear  in 
mind  that  the  fundamental  purpose  of  argument  — 
whether  written  or  spoken  —  is  to  present  truth  in 
such  a  way  as  to  influence  belief,  he  will  at  once 
understand  that  a  debater  should  always  maintain 
toward  his  opponents  the  attitude  of  one  who  is 
trying  to  change  another's  belief,  the  attitude  of 
friendship,  fairness,  and  respect.  Such  a  point  of 
view  precludes  the  use  of  satire,  invective,  or  harsh 
epithets.  These  never  carry  conviction;  in  fact, 
they  invariably  destroy  the  effect  that  an  otherwise 
good  argument  might  produce.  Ridicule  and  blus- 
ter may  please  those  who  already  agree  with  the 
speaker,  but  with  these  people  he  should  be  little 
concerned;  a  debater  worthy  of  the  name  seeks  to 
change  the  opinions  of  those  who  disagree  with  him. 
For  this  reason  he  is  diplomatic,  courteous,  and 
urbane. 

A  debater  should,  moreover,  keep  to  this  same  at- 
titude even  though  his  opponent  introduce  objec- 
tionable personalities.  One  will  find  it  for  his  own 
274 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

best  interest  to  do  so.  Good  humor  makes  a  far 
better  impression  than  anger;  it  suggests  strength 
and  superiority,  while  anger,  as  every  one  knows,  is 
often  the  result  of  chagrin,  and  is  used  to  cover  up 
weaknesses.  Besides,  an  audience  always  sympa- 
thizes with  the  man  who  is  first  attacked.  All  this 
does  not  mean  that  a  debater  should  calmly  submit 
to  unfairness  and  vilification.  On  the  contrary, 
he  should  defend  himself  spiritedly;  but  he  should 
not  meet  abuse  with  abuse.  To  do  so  would  be  to 
throw  away  an  invaluable  opportunity.  He  should 
remain  dignified,  self -controlled,  and  good-hu- 
mored; then  by  treating  his  opponent  as  one  who 
has  inadvertently  fallen  into  error,  and  by  pointing 
out  the  mistakes,  the  unfairness,  and  the  way  in 
which  the  real  question  has  been  ignored,  he  can 
gain  an  inestimable  advantage. 

The  following  quotations  illustrate  both  the  in- 
correct and  the  correct  attitude  for  a  debater  to 
maintain  toward  his  opponent : 

The  gentleman  has  misconceived  the  spirit  and  ten- 
dency of  Northern  institutions.  He  is  ignorant  of  North- 
ern character.  He  has  forgotten  the  history  of  his  coun- 
try. Preach  insurrection  to  the  Northern  laborers! 
Preach  insurrection  to  me!  Who  are  the  Northern  la- 
borers? The  history  of  your  country  is  their  history. 
(Charles  Naylor.) 

My  Fellow-Citizens:     When  a  man  hears  himself  some- 

275 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

what  misrepresented,  it  provokes  him  —  at  least,  I  find  it 
so  with  myself;  but  when  misrepresentation  becomes  very 
gross  and  palpable,  it  is  more  apt  to  amuse  him.  The 
first  thing  I  see  fit  to  notice  is  the  fact  that  Judge  Douglas 
alleges,  after  running  through  the  history  of  the  old  Dem- 
ocratic and  the  old  Whig  parties,  that  Judge  Trumbull 
and  myself  made  an  arrangement  in  1854  by  which  I  was 
to  have  the  place  of  General  Shields  in  the  United  States 
Senate,  and  Judge  Trumbull  was  to  have  the  place  of 
Judge  Douglas.  Now  all  I  have  to  say  upon  that  subject 
is  that  I  think  no  man  —  not  even  Judge  Douglas  —  can 
prove  it,  because  it  is  not  true.  I  have  no  doubt  he  is 
"  conscientious  "  in  saying  it.  As  to  those  resolutions  that 
he  took  such  a  length  of  time  to  read,  as  being  the  plat- 
form of  the  Republican  party  in  1854,  I  say  I  never  had 
anything  to  do  with  them,  and  I  think  Trumbull  never 
had.     (Abraham  Lincoln  in  the  Ottawa  Joint  Debate.) 


HOW  TO  JUDGE  A  DEBATE 

Three  judges  usually  award  the  decision  in  a  de- 
bating contest.  Their  sole  duty  is  to  determine 
which  side  had  the  better  of  the  argument.  Some- 
times the  method  that  they  shall  follow  in  arriving 
at  a  decision  is  marked  out  for  them ;  they  are  given 
printed  slips  indicating  the  relative  importance  of 
evidence,  reasoning,  delivery,  and  the  other  points 
that  must  be  considered.  Most  commonly,  how- 
ever, each  judge  is  instructed  to  decide  for  himself 
what  constitutes  excellence  in  debate.  According 
to  the   rules  governing  any  particular  debate,  the 


Debate — Some  Practical  Suggestions 

judges  may  cast  their  ballots  with  or  without  previ- 
ous consultation  with  each  other. 

The  following  outline  gives  in  condensed  form 
the  main  points  that  a  judge  should  consider.  It 
will  be  of  service  not  only  to  the  judges  of  a  debate 
but  to  the  contestants,  as  it  gives  a  comprehensive 
view  of  just  what  is  expected  of  a  debater. 
I,  Which  side  has  the  better  analysis? 
11.     Which  side  has  the  stronger  proof? 

A.  Consider  the  preponderance  of  the  evi- 

dence. 

B.  Consider  the  quality  of  the  evidence. 

C.  Consider  the  skill  used  in  reasoning. 

III.  Which  side  offers  the  better  refutation? 

A.  See  which  side  has  more  main  points 
left  standing  after  the  refutation  has 
been  given. 

IV.  Wliich  side  has  the  better  delivery? 

A.  Consider  general  bearing,  voice,  and  lan- 
guage. 


277 


CHAPTER  X 

THE  CONCLUSION 

Most  arguments  have  a  more  or  less  formal  end- 
ing. Both  writers  and  speakers,  when  seeking  to 
influence  the  beliefs  and  acts  of  others,  have  usu- 
ally deemed  it  advisable,  upon  completing  their 
proof,  to  add  a  few  summarizing  words  and  to 
make  a  final  appeal  to  the  emotions.  This  part  of 
the  argument  that  comes  at  the  close  and  that  con- 
tains no  new  proof  is  called  the  conchision,  or  the 
peroration.  In  spoken  argument,  occasionally,  the 
conclusion  is  wholly  ignored.  If  at  any  time,  re- 
gardless of  the  point  he  may  have  reached,  an  ar- 
guer  clearly  perceives  that  he  has  won  his  case,  he 
is  wise  to  stop  immediately  and  avoid  the  danger 
of  adding  anything  that  might  possibly  detract  from 
his  success.  Such  an  experience  may  frequently 
happen  to  a  salesman,  a  preacher,  a  lawyer.  Argu- 
ments, however,  that  are  written  or  that  are  de- 
livered before  large  audiences  cannot  be  curtailed 
in  this  way.  Under  such  conditions  the  arguer  is 
278 


The  Conclusion 

unable  to  tell  when  he  has  won  his  case:  he  must 
use  all  his  proof  and  make  it  emphatic  in  every 
way  possible.  Therefore  the  student  who  is  argu- 
ing for  the  sake  of  practice  will  do  well  to  disre- 
gard exceptions  and  to  close  all  his  arguments,  both 
written  and  spoken,  with  a  peroration. 

The  same  two  elements  —  conviction  and  per- 
suasion—  that  make  up  the  introduction  and  the 
discussion  are  ordinarily  found  also  in  the  con- 
clusion. The  general  principles  that  govern  the 
proportionate  amount  of  each  to  be  used  in  the 
first  two  divisions  of  an  argument  apply  equally  to 
the  third  division.  Ir^  every  case  the  relative 
amount  of  space  to  be  devoted  to  conviction  and 
to  persuasion  depends  upon  the  nature  of  the  sub- 
ject and  the  attitude  of  the  audience.  In  some  in- 
stances a  conclusion  should  consist  wholly  of  con- 
viction; in  other  instances  persuasion  should  pre- 
dominate; most  commonly  there  should  be  a  judi- 
cious combination  of  both. 

In  concluding  an  argument  on  "  National  Aid  to 
Good  Roads,"  Jonathan  Bourne  merely  recapitu- 
lates the  points  he  has  already  made.  The  subject 
is  of  such  a  nature  that  only  clear  and  logical  rea- 
soning is  required;  a  fiery  emotional  appeal  would 
be  out  of  place. 

279 


The  Conclusion 

Briefly  summarized  the  plan  for  Federal  aid  here  out- 
lined insures  extensive  road  construction  and  adequate 
maintenance  over  a  long  period  of  years,  enlists  the  co- 
operation of  the  States,  provides  for  efficient  supervision, 
guards  against  the  subservience  of  State  officials  to  a  Fed- 
eral bureau,  prevents  the  building  up  of  a  large  organiza- 
tion that  could  be  used  for  political  purposes,  and  avoids 
legislation  that  might  degenerate  into  a  pork  barrel.  Adop- 
tion of  this  plan  will  result  in  a  vast  saving  of  cost  of 
transportation  on  highways  and  a  corresponding  increase 
in  the  value  of  farm  property.  From  the  standpoint  of 
good  business  judgment  there  is  no  investment  that  offers 
larger  returns  than  expenditures  for  highway  improve- 
ment, provided  the  expenditures  be  made  in  accordance 
with  a  systematic  plan  that  guards  against  waste.^ 

A  type  of  conclusion  far  more  common  and  usu- 
ally far  more  effective  is  one  that  not  only  refers 
to  the  preceding  arguments  but  also  contains  con- 
siderable persuasion.  The  peroration  marks  the 
final  opportunity  for  the  arguer  to  move  his  audi- 
ence. Here  he  should  make  his  greatest  effort. 
Since  belief  and  action  ordinarily  depend  upon  both 
the  intellect  and  the  will,  the  arguer  who  would  at- 
tain success  must  appeal  to  both.  Merely  to  call 
to  mind  the  proof  that  he  has  advanced  is  seldom 
enough:  he  must  arouse  the  emotions.  The  per- 
oration of  an  argument  is  like  the  finish  of  a  race 
or  the  last  charge  in  a  battle.  In  the  conclusion 
the  arguer  should  use  his  greatest  skill,  his  strong- 

1  North  American  Review,  198:331. 
280 


The  Conclusion 

est  eloquence.     Here  are  found  the  most  inspiring 
passages  in  the  masterpieces  of  oratory. 

Some  of  the  various  ways  for  reaching  the  emo- 
tions have  been  pointed  out  in  the  chapter  deahng 
with  persuasion  in  the  introduction.  These  same 
suggestions  apply  equally  well  to  persuasion  in  the 
conclusion.  The  best  advice  that  can  be  given, 
however,  is  for  one  to  use  his  common  sense.  He 
must  consider  his  subject,  his  audience,  his  ability, 
and  his  own  interest  in  the  case  —  all  the  circum- 
stances in  connection  with  his  argument  —  and 
then  depend,  not  upon  some  set  formula,  but  upon 
his  judgment  to  tell  him  in  what  way  he  can  best 
be  persuasive.  The  following  illustrations  will 
give  some  idea  of  how  successful  writers  and  speak- 
ers have  concluded  their  arguments  with  persua- 
sion. Notice  the  patriotic  appeal  in  the  first  quo- 
tation : 

Pray  God  the  time  may  never  come  when  Mammon  and 
the  love  of  ease  shall  so  debase  our  blood  that  we  will  fear 
to  shed  it  for  the  flag  and  its  imperial  destiny.  Pray  God 
the  time  may  never  come  when  American  heroism  is  but 
a  legend  like  the  story  of  the  Cid.  If  American  faith  in 
our  mission  and  our  might  become  a  dream  dissolved,  then 
the  glory  of  our  mighty  race  is  departed. 

And  that  time  will  never  come.  We  will  renew  our 
youth  at  the  fountain  of  new  and  glorious  deeds.  We 
will  exalt  our  reverence  for  the  flag  by  carrying  it  to  a 

281 


The  Conclusion 

noble  future  as  well  as  by  remembering  its  ineffable  past. 
Its  immortality  will  not  pass,  because  everywhere  and  al- 
ways we  will  acknowledge  and  discharge  the  solemn  re- 
sponsibilities our  sacred  flag,  in  its  deepest  meaning,  puts 
upon  us.  And  so,  Senators,  with  reverent  hearts,  where 
dwells  the  fear  of  God,  the  American  people  move  forward 
to  the  future  of  their  hope  and  the  doing  of  His  work.^ 

The  following  peroration  to  a  speech  by  Wendell 
Phillips  on  "  The  Maine  Liquor  Law "  is  espe- 
cially effective: 

1  contend  that  no  man  needs  argument,  no  man  needs 
evidence  on  such  a  subject  as  this;  and  no  man  has  lived 
forty  years  who  has  not  seen  his  pathway  of  life  marked 
by  the  graves  of  some  that  he  loved  most,  from  whose 
promise  he  augured  most,  whose  career  was  to  be  the 
brightest,  who  have  not  fallen  at  his  side,  victims  of  the 
drink  curse.  I  should  not  dare  to  uncover  one  single  roof 
in  this  city,  no  matter  how  guarded  by  wealth,  education 
or  any  other  fence;  for  I  should  be  sure  to  find  even  in 
the  narrowest  family  circle,  one  vacant  seat  which  this 
gigantic  tempter  had  emptied.  I  have  only  such  a  tale 
to  tell  as  every  one  of  your  hearts  bears  witness  to.  Law- 
yer, merchant,  divine  —  no  matter  where  you  take  your 
testimony,  every  man's  heart  is  full,  every  man's  memory 
is  the  most  accusing  witness  against  this  great  social  evil. 

Edith  Abbott  concludes  her  magazine  article  on 
^'  The  English  Working-woman  and  the  Fran- 
chise/' with  a  touch  of  pathos: 

One  feels  more  strongly  perhaps  the  magnificent  promise 
of  this  movement  when  one  has  seen  in  the  great  textile 

2  Albert  J.  Beveridge,  United  States  Senate,  Jan.  9,  1900. 

282 


The  Conclusion 

districts  of  England  the  long  processions  of  women  with 
their  shawls  pinned  tightly  about  their  heads,  passing  to 
or  from  the  mills  in  the  early  morning  and  the  late  twi- 
light. These  shawled  women  have  for  generations  been 
passing  everywhere  in  the  Lancashire  district;  for  genera- 
tions they  have  inherited  the  burdens  of  life  with  few  of  its 
opportunities.  As  they  have  worked  patiently  there  for 
more  than  a  hundred  years,  so  they  are  still  working  pa- 
tiently, but  they  are  awake  as  they  have  never  been  be- 
fore to  the  injustice  of  their  position;  and  this  movement 
for  the  franchise  is  symptomatic  of  a  new  solidarity 
among  them  which  has  grown  out  of  a  new  consciousness 
of  their  own  needs,  and  which  brings  with  it  a  new  sense 
of  their  own  power.  When  one  knows  something  of  the 
history  of  these  "  women  in  industry,"  of  their  share  in  the 
development  of  the  textile  industries,  their  generations  of 
work  under  the  discipHne  of  Lancashire  cold  and  fog,  the 
slow  but  steady  growth  of  their  great  trade  unions,  one 
can  understand  the  earnestness,  the  moderation,  and  intel- 
ligence that  they  have  shown  in  this  campaign.  And  al- 
most inevitably  one  believes  that,  when  this  political  jus- 
tice has  been  meted  out  to  them,  industrial  justice  must  be 
swift  to  follow.3 

As  a  rule,  most  of  the  criticisms  that  can  be 
made  of  any  conclusion  pertain  to  matters  of  taste 
and  judgment.  A  writer  or  speaker  may  have 
made  too  detailed  or  too  brief  a  summary;  he  may 
have  erred  in  choosing  the  best  method  of  persua- 
sion ;  he  may  have  injured  his  argument  in  almost 
countless  other  ways.  In  these  matters  a  text-book 
can  give  only  general  and  rather  vague  instruction. 

3  Atlantic  Monthly,   102:346. 

283 


The  Conclusion 

Each  argument  must  be  suited  to  the  particular 
case  in  hand.  There  are  several  common  errors  in 
students'  work,  however,  that  should  always  be 
avoided  and  that  can  definitely  be  pointed  out. 

1.  An  argument  should  not  have  an  abrupt  and 
jerky  ending.  It  is  not  uncommon  especially  in 
class-room  debate,  to  hear  a  student  at  the  close  of 
his  discussion  say,  "  This  is  my  proof ;  I  leave  the 
decision  to  the  judges  " ;  or  "  Thus  you  see  I  have 
established  my  proposition."  Such  an  ending  can 
in  no  way  be  called  a  conclusion  or  a  peroration. 

2.  A  conclusion  should  contain  no  new  proof. 
Violations  of  this  principle  brand  an  arguer  as 
careless,  and  greatly  weaken  his  argument.  Proof 
is  most  convincing  when  arranged  in  its  proper 
place  and  in  its  logical  order.  Furthermore,  the 
purpose  of  the  conclusion  is  to  review  the  points 
that  have  already  been  established.  If  the  arguer 
forgets  this  fact  and  mixes  proof  with  summary, 
the  audience  is  liable  to  become  badly  confused  and 
not  know  what  has  been  established  and  what  has 
not. 

3.  A  conclusion  should  not  refer  to  a  point  that 
has  not  already  been  established.  A  careless  writer 
or  debater  will  sometimes  state  that  he  has  proved 

284 


The  Conclusion 

an  argument  which  he  has  not  previously  touched 
upon.  Such  a  procedure  smacks  of  trickery  or  ig- 
norance, and  is  sure  to  be  disastrous.  Not  only 
will  the  audience  throw  out  that  particular  point, 
but  they  will  be  highly  prejudiced  against  both  the 
arguer  and  his  argument.  It  is  permissible  for 
one  to  maintain  that  he  has  proved  a  point  even 
though  the  proof  be  somewhat  inadequate,  but  for 
one  to  refer  in  his  conclusion  to  a  point  that  he 
then  mentions  for  the  first  time  is  unpardonable. 

4.  A  conclusion  must  reaffirm  the  proposition  ex- 
actly as  stated  at  the  beginning.  Sometimes  a 
writer,  discovering  at  the  close  of  his  argument 
that  he  has  not  stuck  to  his  subject  but  has  proved 
something  different,  or  at  best  has  proved  only  a 
part  of  his  subject,  states  as  his  decision  a  totally 
different  proposition  from  that  with  which  he 
started.  To  illustrate,  a  student  once  attempted  to 
argue  on  the  affirmative  side  of  the  proposition, 
"  The  United  States  should  discontinue  its  protec- 
tive tariff  policy  " ;  but  he  gave  as  his  concluding 
sentence,  ''  These  facts,  then,  prove  to  you  that  our 
present  tariff*  duties  are  too  high.'*  This  last  sen- 
tence embodied  the  real  proposition  which  he  had 
discussed,  and  if  he  had  taken  as  his  subject,  "  Our 
285 


The  Conclusion 

present  tariff  duties  are  too  high,"  his  argument 
would  have  been  successful.  As  it  was,  his  failure 
to  support  the  proposition  with  which  he  started 
rendered  his  whole  effort  worthless. 

A  conclusion  that  is  weaker  than  the  proposition 
is  commonly  called  a  "  qualifying  conclusion." 
When  one  has  fallen  into  this  error  there  are  two 
possible  ways  of  removing  it:  one  is  to  change  the 
whole  argument  so  that  the  conclusion  will  affirm 
the  truth  or  falsity  of  the  proposition ;  the  other  is 
to  change  the  proposition.  In  a  debate,  of  course, 
or  whenever  a  subject  is  assigned,  the  latter  method 
cannot  be  followed. 

As  a  final  example  of  what  a  good  peroration 
should  be,  consider  the  conclusion  to  Senator 
Hoar's  speech  against  the  retention  of  the  Philip- 
pines. Notice  the  skilful  interweaving  of  summa- 
rizing arguments  with  persuasive  appeal,  and  re- 
member in  connection  with  the  principle  of  propor- 
tion that  this  is  the  conclusion  of  a  speech 
containing  about  12,000  words. 

Our  fathers  dreaded  a  standing  army;  but  the  Senator's 
doctrine,  put  in  practice  anywhere,  now  or  hereafter,  ren- 
ders necessary  a  standing  army,  to  be  reinforced  by  a  pow- 
erful navy.  Our  fathers  denounced  the  subjection  of  any 
people  whose  judges  were  appointed  or  whose  salaries  were 
paid  by  a  foreign  power;  but  the  Senator's  doctrine  re- 
286 


The  Conclusion 

quires  us  to  send  to  a  foreign  people  judges,  not  of  their 
own  selection,  appointed  and  paid  by  us.  The  Senator's 
doctrine,  whenever  it  shall  be  put  in  practice,  will  entail 
upon  us  a  national  debt  larger  than  any  now  existing  on 
the  face  of  the  earth,  larger  than  any  ever  known  in  his- 
tory. 

Our  fathers  dreaded  the  national  tax  gatherer;  but  the 
doctrine  of  the  Senator  from  Connecticut,  if  it  be  adopted, 
is  sure  to  make  our  national  tax  gatherer  the  most  familiar 
visitant  to  every  American  home. 

Our  fathers  respected  above  all  the  dignity  of  labor  and 
rights  of  human  nature.  The  one  thing  created  by  God  a 
little  lower  than  the  angels  was  a  man.  And  they  meant 
to  send  abroad  the  American  flag  bearing  upon  its  folds, 
invisible  perhaps  to  the  bodily  eye,  but  visible  to  the  spirit- 
ual discernment,  the  legend  of  the  dignity  of  pure  man- 
hood. That  legend,  that  charter,  that  fundamental  truth, 
is  written  in  the  opening  sentences  of  the  great  Declara- 
tion, and  now  the  Senator  from  Connecticut  would  repeal 
them.  He  would  repeal  the  great  charter  of  our  covenant. 
No  longer,  as  the  flag  floats  over  distant  seas,  shall  it  bear 
on  its  folds  to  the  downtrodden  and  oppressed  among  men 
the  glad  tidings  that  there  is  at  least  one  spot  where  that 
beautiful  dream  is  a  living  reality. 

The  poor  Malay,  the  poor  African,  the  downtrodden 
workman  of  Europe,  will  exclaim,  as  he  reads  this  new 
doctrine :  "  Good  God !  Is  there  not  one  place  left  on 
earth  where  in  right  of  my  manhood  I  can  stand  up  and 
be  a  man?"  Will  you  disregard  every  lesson  of  experi- 
ence? No  tropical  colony  was  ever  yet  successfully  ad- 
ministered without  a  system  of  contract  labor  strictly  ad- 
ministered and  enforced  by  the  Government.  I  will  not 
speak  of  the  Thirteenth  Amendment.  In  our  parliamen- 
tary practice  amendments  fall  with  the  original  bill.  This 
amendment  will  fall  with  the  original  Constitution. 

Mr.  President,  this  spasm  of  folly  and  delusion  also,  in 
287 


The  Conclusion 

my  judgment,  will  surely  pass  by.  Whether  it  pass  by  or 
no,  I  thank  God  I  have  done  my  duty,  and  that  I  have 
adhered  to  the  great  doctrines  of  righteousness  and  free- 
dom, which  I  learned  from  my  fathers,* 

4  George  Frisbee  Hoar,  United  States  Senate,  Jan.  9,  1899- 


288 


APPENDICES 


289 


APPENDIX  A 

A  WRITTEN  ARGUMENT  AND  ITS  BRIEF 
ENFORCED  COMPETITION^ 

BY   RAY    MORRIS 

The  main  fabric  of  American  railroad  legisla- 
tion rests  on  two  principles,  which  are  all  but  ir- 
reconcilable with  each  other:  first,  that  carriers 
serving  the  same  or  adjacent  territory  must  com- 
pete with  one  another;  second,  that  rates  for  like 
and  contemporaneous  service  under  substantially 
similar  circumstances  and  conditions  must  be  the 
same  to  all  comers  —  that  is  to  say,  not  competitive 
—  and  that  one  city  or  territory  must  not  be  built 
up  at  the  expense  of  another  (long-and-short-haul 
clause)  ;  a  process  which  is  directly  and  naturally 
the  result  of  competition.  The  Act  to  Regulate 
Commerce  prohibits  pooling,  and  the  Sherman 
Anti-Trust  Law  apparently  makes  every  kind  of 
trade  agreement  between  persons  engaged  in  the 

1  Atlantic  Monthly,  102:366.     Abridged. 
290 


Argument  and  Brief 


THE  SHERMAN  LAW  SHOULD  BE  RE- 
PEALED 

Affirmative  Brief 

INTRODUCTION 

I.    American   railroad   legislation    rests   on   two 
contradictory  principles : 

A.  Carriers   serving  the   same   or   adjacent 

territory  must  be  competitive. 

B.  These  carriers  must  not  compete  in  the 

rates  they  charge. 


II.    The  following  laws  apply  to  railroads: 

A.  The  Act  to  Regulate  Commerce  prohibits 

pooling. 

B.  The    Sherman    Anti-Trust    Law    makes 

every  kind  of  trade  agreement  between 
persons  engaged  in  the  same  kind  of 
business  an  act  of  conspiracy. 
291 


Argument  and  Brief 

same  kind  of  business  an  act  of  conspiracy,  so  that 
Congress  has  strongly  affirmed  the  competitive 
principle;  yet  the  1906  revision  of  the  Commerce 
Act  makes  it  specifically  impossible  for  a  carrier  to 
change  its  rates  without  giving  thirty  days'  prior 
notice  to  the  Interstate  Commerce  Commission,  un- 
less the  Commission  exempts  it  by  special  action, 
an  exemption  which  the  commissioners  have  been 
very  loath  to  give.  This  provision  is,  of  course, 
along  lines  the  reverse  of  competitive,  since  a 
thirty-day-notice  cut-rate  to  move  competitive  traf- 
fic is  about  as  effective  a  device  as  setting  a  tortoise 
to  catch  a  squirrel.  So  the  railroads  are  told  with 
blunt  plainness  that  they  must  compete,  and  are 
then  immediately  reminded  that  they  must  not. 

The  Sherman  Anti-Trust  Law  of  1890  says  defi- 
nitely that  every  person  v/ho  makes  a  contract  or 
engages  in  any  combination,  in  the  form  of  a  trust 
or  otherwise,  in  restraint  of  trade  or  commerce,  is 
guilty  of  a  misdemeanor  and  subject  to  severe  pen- 
alties, which  have  been  made  cumulative  by  sub- 
sequent court  decisions;  and  eminent  corporation 
counsel  have  expressed  the  opinion  that  it  is  tech- 
nically impossible  for  two  New  York  grocers  in 
the  same  block  to  walk  down  the  street  together 
and  agree  on  the  price  at  which  they  will  sell  New 
292 


Argument  and  Brief 


C.  The  1906  revision  of  the  Commerce  Act 
forbids  a  carrier  to  change  rates  with- 
out giving  thirty  days'  prior  notice,  un- 
less exempted  by  the  Interstate  Com- 
merce Commission. 
I.  This  exemption  has  rarely  been 
given. 


III.  The  Sherman  Law  upholds  the  doctrine  of 
individual  competition  with  tremendous 
vigor. 


293 


Argument  and  Brief 

Jersey  eggs,  without  rendering  themselves  Uable  to 
fine  and  imprisonment,  and  to  threefold  damages 
payable  to  any  other  grocer  whose  business  is  in- 
jured by  the  reduction  in  price  agreed  upon.  Thus 
the  doctrine  of  individual  competition  is  upheld 
with  tremendous  vigor,  while  trade  agreement,  or 
collective  competition,  is  strongly  repressed. 

Are  we,  as  a  nation,  correct  in  assuming  that  in- 
dividual competition  can  and  should  be  enforced 
by  law?  These  questions  open  up  a  very  interest- 
ing field  of  economic  discussion,  which  is  of  par- 
ticular appropriateness  because  we  are  apparently 
on  the  threshold  of  an  era  of  sharp  competition 
between  railroads. 

As  applied  to  the  railroad  situation  in  the  United 
States,  the  discouraging  fact  about  competition  leg- 
islation is  that  it  was  given  an  exhaustive  trial  in 
England,  fifty  years  ago,  at  which  time  certain 
truths  were  developed  at  great  cost  which,  so  far 
as  we  are  concerned,  need  never  have  been  devel- 
oped at  all,  since  we  have  not  noted  the  relation 
of  these  truths  to  our  own  problems,  but  are  pro- 
ceeding independently,  at  still  greater  cost,  to  de- 
velop the  same  principles  in  this  country. 

Charles  Francis  Adams  showed  that  it  had  al- 
ways been  the  theory  in  England  that  the  railroads 
294 


Argument  and  Brief 


IV.     The  questions  to  be  answered  are  these : 

A.  Can   individual  competition  be  enforced 

by  law? 

B.  Should    individual    competition    be    en- 

forced by  law? 


DISCUSSION 

Individual  competition  cannot  be  enforced  by 

law,  because 
A.     England  failed  to  compel  competition  by 
law,  for 
I.     Up  to  1872  England  tried  to  enforce 
competition.       (Charles       Francis 
Adams.) 


295 


Argument  and  Brief 

ought  to  compete,  until  the  commission  of  1872 
demonstrated  that  in  the  forty  years  since  railroads 
began,  English  railroad  legislation  had  never  ac- 
complished anything  which  it  sought  to  bring  about, 
nor  prevented  anything  it  sought  to  hinder.  Thir- 
ty-three hundred  useless  enactments  had  cost  the 
companies  eighty  million  pounds,  but  the  commis- 
sion reported  that  competition  between  railroads 
existed  only  to  a  limited  extent,  and  that  it  could 
not  be  maintained  by  legislation.  The  commission 
cited  the  case  of  the  North  Eastern  Railway,  for- 
merly composed  of  thirty-seven  independent,  com- 
peting, and  more-or-less  bankrupt  companies,  but 
in  1872  (as  to-day)  prosperous  and  giving  general 
satisfaction,  and  found  that  in  view  of  such  facts  as 
this  it  was  clear  that  amalgamation  had  "  not 
brought  with  it  the  evils  that  were  anticipated,  but 
that  in  any  event,  long  and  varied  experience  had 
fully  demonstrated  the  fact  that,  while  Parliament 
might  hinder  and  thwart,  it  could  not  prevent  it, 
and  it  was  equally  powerless  to  lay  down  any 
general  rules  determining  its  limits  or  charac- 
ter." 

The  attitude  of  British  law  toward  the  broad 
question  of  competition  between  the  railroads  of 
that  country  does  not  find  particularly  clear  ex- 
296 


Argument  and  Brief 

.    According  to  the  commission  of  1872 
railroad    legislation    during    forty 
years,    consisting    of    3300    enact- 
ments, had  not  produced  competi- 
tion, since 
a.    Parliament  had  failed  to  prevent 
the    amalgamation    of    thirty- 
seven     competing     companies 
into  the  North  Eastern  Rail- 
way System. 


3.     England  now  permits  railroad  com- 
binations, as 
297 


Argument  and  Brief 

pression  to-day,  but  the  conservative  work  of  the 
Railway  and  Canal  Commission,  which  owes  its  ex- 
istence to  the  parliamentary  report  just  referred  to, 
and  the  precedent  of  a  long  line  of  court  decisions, 
make  it  quite  apparent  that  the  early  lessons  have 
had  their  effect.  The  working  agreement  recently 
proposed  by  the  Great  Northern  and  Great  Central 
companies,  which  had  competed  extravagantly  in 
almost  identical  territory  in  the  eastern  part  of 
England,  was  not  opposed  on  any  broad  lines  of 
governmental  polic3^  The  arrangement  amounted 
to  a  consolidation,  to  be  brought  about  by  the  sim- 
ple device  of  appointing  the  boards  of  directors  of 
the  two  companies  as  a  joint  committee  to  manage 
both  properties.  This  proposal  was  contested 
chiefly  by  certain  other  railroads  because  of  its  re- 
lation to  their  own  special  interests,  and  was  refused 
by  the  Railway  and  Canal  Commission  (in  which 
refusal  the  Commission  was  upheld  by  the  Court 
of  Appeal)  for  the  purely  technical  reason  that 
the  original  charter  powers  of  the  two  companies 
did  not  provide  for  any  such  agreement.  A  work- 
ing arrangement  has  been  in  force  for  three  years 
between  the  London  &  North  Western  and  the 
Lancashire  &  Yorkshire,  and  has  been  conspicu- 
ously successful,  resulting  in  greater  efficiency  and 
298 


Argument  and  Brief 

a.  A  working  agreement  between 
the  Great  Northern  and  the 
Great  Central  companies  was 
refused  on  purely  technical 
grounds. 


b.  A  working  arrangement  has  been 
in  force  for  three  years  be- 
tween the  London  &  North 
Western  and  the  Lancashire  & 
Yorkshire. 


299 


Argument  and  Brief 

economy  of  operation  to  the  railroads  and  better 
service  to  the  public. 

But  our  national  attitude  toward  consolidation  of 
steam  railroads  which  from  their  geographical  lo- 
cation are  presumed  to  be  competitors,  is  perfectly 
uncompromising;  so  uncompromising  that,  practi- 
cally speaking,  it  is  unenforcible  in  its  entire  pur- 
view. There  are  few  indeed  of  the  railroad  sys- 
tems of  the  country  that  really  know  whether  their 
skirts  are  clear  of  the  entanglements  of  the  law,  as 
it  has  at  present  been  construed;  and  it  is  hard  to 
see  how  any  large  industrial  company  can  avoid 
being  a  combination  intrinsically  in  restraint  of 
some  other  man's  trade,  and  hence  illegal.  To  all 
intent,  the  government  can  exercise  the  widest 
choice  in  its  selection  of  victims ;  a  condition  w^hich 
gives  opportunity  for  unlimited  favoritism,  and 
tends  to  inject  a  personal  element  into  prosecutions. 

The  futility  of  the  en  forced-competition  legisla- 
tion, when  actually  carried  out,  needs  but  a  single 
instance  —  the  Northern  Securities  case.  James  J. 
Hill  controlled  the  Great  Northern  Railway  and 
was  influential  in  the  Northern  Pacific,  but  these 
lines  had  no  proprietary  access  to  Chicago,  coming 
no  nearer  to  it  than  St.  Paul,  and  Ashland,  Wiscon- 
sin. The  joint  purchase  of  the  Chicago,  Burling- 
300 


Argument  and  Brief 

B.     Enforced  competition  as  embodied  in  the 
Sherman  Law  has  failed  in  the  United 
States,  for 
I.     The  law  is  so  uncompromising  as  to 
be  unenforcible,  because 

a.  Few   roads   know   whether  they 

are  really  guilty  or  not. 

b.  Large   industrial    companies   can 

hardly    help    being    guilty    to 
some  extent. 

c.  The  personal  element  enters  into 

prosecutions,  as 
i'.     Opportunity  is  given  for  un- 
limited  favoritism,  since 
a'.     The  government  can  ex- 
ercise    a     very      wide 
choice  in  its  selection  of 
victims. 


301 


Argument  and  Brief 

ton  &  Quincy  by  the  Great  Northern  and  the  Nor- 
thern Pacific,  in  1901,  was  really  designed  primarily 
to  afford  a  perpetually  friendly  route  into  Chicago, 
the  absence  of  which  had  handicapped  the  Hill  lines 
in  securing  what  they  considered  a  full  share  of 
transcontinental  traffic.  To  thwart  this  plan,  Mr. 
Harriman  and  his  associates,  as  everybody  remem- 
bers, began  buying  Northern  Pacific  in  the  open 
market  in  March,  1901,  and  actually  got  control 
of  that  property  by  a  narrow  margin, —  the  price  of 
stock  going  from  fifty-eight  dollars  a  share  to  one 
thousand  dollars  during  the  process.  Both  parties 
saw  the  futility  of  cut-throat  competition,  however, 
and  compromised  the  matter  by  forming  the  Nor- 
thern Securities  Company,  which  ultimately  held  a 
very  large  proportion  of  the  capital  stocks  of  the 
Great  Northern  and  Northern  Pacific.  The  Nor- 
thern Securities  Company  was  bitterly  opposed  in 
the  Minnesota  courts,  and  was  dissolved  by  the 
United  States  Supreme  Court  in  1904,  on  the 
ground  that  it  was  a  combination  in  restraint  of 
trade. 

Well,    let    us    see    what    happened    then.     The 
Northern  Pacific  was  the  original  bone  of  conten- 
tion.    The  device  of  the  Securities  Company  kept 
the  Northern  Pacific  Cand  one-half  of  a  half-con- 
302 


Argument  and  Brief 


2.     The  Northern  Securities  case  is  an 
instance  of  how  enforced  competi- 
tion has  failed  of  its  purpose,  for 
303 


Argument  and  Brief 

trol  of  the  Burlington)  equitably  poised  between 
Hill  and  Harriman ;  the  distribution  required  by  the 
dissolution  of  the  Securities  Company  by  the  Su- 
preme Court  decision  was  pro  rata,  and  resulted  in 
leaving  an  absolute  monopoly  of  three  companies 
in  Mr.  Hill's  hands, —  the  Great  Northern  (which 
he  started  with),  the  Northern  Pacific  (with  which 
Mr.  Harriman  went  into  the  Securities  Company), 
and  the  Burlington,  which  had  been  divided  between 
the  Great  Northern  and  the  Northern  Pacific. 

The  Northern  Securities  decision  was  widely  her- 
alded as  a  positive  governmental  affirmation  of  the 
principle  of  enforced  competition, —  but  does  it  ap- 
pear that  any  important  reduction  in  monopoly  was 
effected  thereby?  Apart  from  the  technical  result 
of  the  decision,  Mr.  Hill  got  absolute  control  of 
eight  thousand  miles  of  parallel  and  competing  lines 
of  which  he  previously  shared  control  with  Mr. 
Harriman.  His  monopoly  in  the  American  North- 
west w^as  strengthened,  not  weakened. 

The  original  purpose  of  the  Sherman  Anti-Trust 
Law  was  undoubtedly  to  restrain  manufacturing, 
rather  than  transportation,  combination.  Let  us  see 
what  it  accomplishes  here. 

In  every  branch  of  manufacturing,  efficiency  and 
economy  have  been  carried  to  lengths  undreamed  of 
304 


Argument  and  Brief 


a.  The  outcome  of  the  case  gave 
James  J.  Hill  absolute  control 
of  more  miles  of  railroad  than 
he  had  controlled  before. 


305 


Argument  and  Brief 

ill  early  days,  simply  because  they  had  to  be,  if  the 
products  were  to  be  marketed  in  competition  with 
similar  products  made  somewhere  else. 

But  this  competitive  efficiency  was  not  law-made ; 
the  law  had  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  it.  The 
law  did  not  require  Eli  \\Tiitney  to  invent  the  cotton 
gin,  nor  was  it  instrumental  in  producing  the  sew- 
ing machine,  or  the  power-loom,  or  the  steamboat, 
or  the  telephone. 

Just  as  soon  as  combination  gets  two  or  three  or 
more  competing  streams  of  industry  diverted  into 
the  same  channel  and  attempts  to  raise  prices  it  in- 
vites fresh  competitors  into  the  same  field,  and  also 
stimulates  invention  and  resourcefulness  to  provide 
substitutes.  Sometimes  one  of  these  effects  is  pro- 
duced; sometimes  the  other;  sometimes  both  to- 
gether. It  follows,  therefore,  that  the  successful 
combinations  are  those  which  use  their  organiza- 
tion to  effect  economies,  which  keep  the  distribution 
price  of  their  products  just  a  little  too  low  to  tempt 
outsiders.  The  four  corners  of  the  world  are  tied 
so  tightly  together  nowadays  by  steam  and  cable 
that  competition  has  a  long  arm:  American  meat 
and  meat-products  compete  in  Europe,  not  only  with 
European  producers  but  with  Australia,  New  Zea- 
land, and  South  Africa;  Denmark  and  Devonshire 
306 


Argument  and  Brief 

II.     Competition  should  not  be  enforced  by  law 
in  the  United  States,  because 

A.  The  argument  that  law-made  competition 

promotes  efficiency  is  false,  since 

1.  Efficiency  and  economy  of  manufac- 

ture have  been  promoted  by  other 
causes. 

2.  Such   inventions   as   the   cotton   gin, 

sewing  machine,  power-loom, 
steamboat,  and  telephone  were  not 
the  result  of  law-made  competition. 

B.  The  argument  that  combinations   neces- 

sarily kill  natural  competition  is  untrue, 
because 

1.  If    combinations    raise   prices,    fresh 

competitors  are  invited  into  the 
same  field. 

2.  If    prices    are    raised,    invention    is 

stimulated  and  substitutes  are  pro- 
vided. 

3.  American  concerns  have  to  compete 

with  foreign  companies,  for 
a.     Steam    and    cable    have    brought 
all  countries  close  together. 


307 


Argument  and  Brief 

place  their  dairy  products  side  by  side  in  the  Lon- 
don market,  with  a  shght  advantage  in  favor  of 
Denmark ;  and  oil  from  Kansas  and  Texas  must  be 
sold  at  an  extremely  low  figure  in  Calcutta  if  it  is 
to  compete  with  oil  from  Baku. 

We  have  heard  much  about  the  "  Beef  Trust " 
in  the  last  few  years,  and  a  considerable  element 
of  the  daily  press  has  actually  maintained  with  bit- 
terness that  a  group  of  Chicago  packing-houses 
could  make  prices  for  meat  as  high  as  they  chose, 
in  utter  disregard  of  the  fact  that  cattle,  sheep,  hogs, 
and  chickens  can  be  raised  in  every  State  in  the 
Union,  and  that  thousands  of  local  butchers  would 
be  delighted  to  undersell  the  *'  trust  '*  if  current 
prices  were  high  enough  to  make  it  profitable.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  this  omnipresent  local  competition 
is  felt  especially  strongly  in  the  provision  business, 
and  there  is  perhaps  no  other  large  industry  where 
the  margin  of  profit  is  smaller  in  proportion  to  the 
capital  tied  up.  The  net  profit  which  a  great  pack- 
ing-house derives  from  buying  a  steer,  slaughter- 
ing it,  and  selling  the  meat  and  the  by-products  is 
around  two  dollars,  or  approximately  four-fifths  of 
the  commission  which  a  banker  gets  for  the  com- 
bined purchase  and  sale  of  a  bond,  with  the  im- 
portant difference  that  the  banker  gets  spot  cash 

308 


Argument  and  Brief 


The  argument  that   combinations   cause 
high  prices  is  not  true,  since 


I.  The  much  talked  of  Beef  Trust 
works  on  a  great  deal  smaller  mar- 
gin of  profit  than  does  the  banker 
when  he  sells  a  bond. 

309 


Argument  and  Brief 

or  marketable  collateral  to  cover  his  capital  expendi- 
ture, while  the  packing-house  pays  spot  cash  for 
what  it  buys,  but  has  to  carry  an  open  account  un- 
secured for  what  it  sells.  Yet  the  government  has 
been  so  afraid  of  combination  in  this  industry,  and 
has  taken  such  vigorous  steps  to  prevent  it,  that  the 
Chicago  packers  no  longer  dare  meet  together  to 
settle  details  of  mutual  helpfulness. 

The  very  fact  of  the  ease  with  which  competition 
takes  place  in  the  provision  business  accounts  for 
the  concentration  of  capital  in  the  gigantic  packing 
plants  at  Chicago,  Kansas  City,  and  Omaha.  As  in 
nearly  every  other  manufacturing  industry,  concen- 
tration brings  efficiency  with  it;  every  one  of  the 
by-products  can  be  developed  to  the  highest  com- 
mercial degree,  and  profits  are  made,  not  by  raising 
prices  but  by  eliminating  waste.  There  is  no  doubt 
that  the », small,  independent  butcher  finds  it  harder 
to  make  a  living  than  he  would  if  the  great  plants 
were  not  able,  by  their  efficient  organization,  to  sell 
meat  a  thousand  miles  from  where  it  is  dressed,  at 
the  smallest  fraction  above  cost ;  but  there  is  nothing 
in  this  situation  to  cause  the  consumer  uneasiness. 
It  is  possible  to  demonstrate  the  truth  of  this  in  a 
striking  manner  by  means  of  the  industrial  statistics 
collected  by  the  Bureau  of  Labor,  not  only  in  the 
310 


Argument  and  Brief 


2.     This  trust  makes  much  of  its  profit 
by  eliminating  waste,  because 


3" 


Argument  and  Brief 

provision  industry,  but  in  others  which  may  be  se- 
lected as  highly  organized. 

The  price  of  all  farm  products  (non-concentra- 
tion of  capital)  was  28.6  per  cent,  higher  in  1906 
than  in  1898;  the  price  of  beefsteak  (concentration 
of  capital)  rose  only  14.2  per  cent,  in  the  same 
period. 

Much  has  been  said  about  the  "  Sugar  Trust,"  as 
representing  an  oppressive  economic  system,  and  the 
activities  of  this  trust,  along  with  all  the  others, 
are  supposed  to  have  become  much  more  baneful 
in  the  last  decade  than  in  former  times.  Note,  then, 
that  the  average  price  of  sugar  was  4.7  per  cent, 
less  in  1908  than  it  was  in  1901,  and  3.1  per  cent, 
less  in  1906  than  it  was  in  1898. 

It  would  be  possible  to  cite  many  more  examples 
illustrating  the  tendency  of  raw  materials  and 
manufactured  articles  representing  no  concentra- 
tion of  capital  to  increase  in  price  faster  than  those 
articles  produced  by  concentration  of  capital  and  the 
supposed  elimination  of  competition.  To  take  a 
few  illustrations  at  random:  candles  (concentration, 
non-competitive)  were  2  per  cent,  cheaper  in  1906 
than  in  1890-99;  axes  (non-concentration,  competi- 
tive) were  43.1  per  cent,  dearer;  hides  (raw  ma- 
terial, competitive)  rose  in  price  64.7  per  cent.; 
312 


Argument  and  Brief 


a.  According  to  the  Bureau  of  La- 

bor the  price  of  all  farm  prod- 
ucts (non-concentration  of 
capital)  rose  28.6  per  cent,  be- 
tween 1898  and  1906. 

b.  The  price  of  beefsteak  (concen- 

tration of  capital)  rose  14.2 
per  cent,  in  the  same  period. 

3.  The  Sugar  Trust  lowered  the  price 

of  sugar  4.7  per  cent,  between  1901 
and  1908. 

4.  It  lowered  the  price  of  sugar  3.1  per 

cent,  between  1898  and  1906. 

5.  Candles  (concentration,  non-competi- 

tive) were  2  per  cent,  cheaper  in 
1906  than  in  1890-99. 

6.  Axes     (non-concentration,     competi- 

tive) were  43.1  per  cent,  dearer. 

7.  Hides    (competitive)    rose   64.7   per 

cent. 

8.  Leather    (concentration)     rose    20.4 

per  cent. 


313 


Argument  and  Brief 

leather  (concentration  of  capital,  reduced  competi- 
tion) increased  20.4  per  cent. 

The  Government  in  its  arraignment  of  the  Stand- 
ard Oil  Company  admitted  freely  that  the  combina- 
tion has  not  made  prices  burdensome,  but  argued 
that  it  might  have  made  them  cheaper. 

It  is  more  or  less  generally  recognized  that  the  ef- 
fects of  competition  fall  short  of  any  usefulness 
in  certain  public-service  enterprises.  Nobody  saves 
telephone  bills  by  living  in  a  city  which  is  served  by 
two  or  three  competing  telephone  companies. 
Even  if  the  toll-rate  is  low,  two  or  three  cheap  serv- 
ices cost  more  than  one  dear  one,  and  a  business  man 
must  have  them  all.  This  is  a  case  where  monopoly 
is  convenient  to  the  consumer ;  a  street  railway  in  a 
crowded  district  usually  furnishes  a  case  of  monop- 
oly which  is  inevitable.  The  clearest  thinkers  in  all 
countries  now  concede  that  regulation  furnishes  a 
better  solution  in  safeguarding  the  public  welfare 
than  competition  does,  throughout  a  fairly  long  list 
of  what  are  generally  termed  public-service  enter- 
prises. The  most  conservative  of  these  think- 
ers believe,  probably  without  so  much  as  rais- 
ing the  question  in  their  own  minds,  that  police 
forces  and  sewer  systems  are  branches  of  the  public 
service  which  can  best  be  provided  for  by  the 
^  314 


Argument  and  Brief 


9.  The  Government  admitted  that  Stand- 
ard Oil  has  not  made  prices  bur- 
densome. 


D.     Monopoly  is  often  highly  desirable,  be- 
cause 
I.     This  is  true  of  the  telephone  service, 
since 
a.     The  service  is  cheaper,  for 
i'.     One   rate,   even   if   high,   is 
cheaper  than  several  cheap 
rates. 
2'.     Business  men  must  have  all 
the  telephones  in  use. 


315 


Argument  and  Brief 

municipality  itself.  It  is  also  quite  universally  con- 
ceded that  the  control  and  supply  of  a  city's  drink- 
ing water  ought  to  be  a  regulated  monopoly  rather 
than  a  competitive  industry.  There  is  difference  of 
opinion  whether  better  service  is  obtained  from 
waterworks  owned  by  private  capital  or  from  water- 
works owned  by  the  municipahty,  but  this  point  is 
alien  to  our  discussion. 

Further  down  on  the  list  come  lighting  and  heat- 
ing plants,  telephones,  and  street  railways.  We  do 
not  want  w^arfare  between  the  companies  supplying 
us  with  gas  or  electricity,  involving  fluctuating  rates 
and  large  liability  of  interruptions  to  service  because 
of  wars  and  receiverships;  we  want  regular,  undis- 
turbed service.  The  reason  why  competitive  tele- 
phones are  undesirable  has  already  been  stated.  As 
regards  street  railways,  competition  under  any  cir- 
cumstances must  be  of  vtry  limited  extent,  because 
the  company  first  on  the  ground  will  always  have 
secured  the  best  routes,  at  least  for  a  term  of  years, 
and  it  is  not  generally  either  feasible  or  desirable  for 
two  companies  to  operate  on  the  same  street. 
Where  competition  in  one  form  or  another  does  ex- 
ist between  street  railways  in  the  same  town,  it  may 
be  taken  for  granted  that  transfer  privileges  will 
not  be  liberal,  that  traffic  will  be  interrupted,  and 
316 


Argument  and  Brief 


Competition  between  heating  and 
lighting  plants  results  in  fluctuation 
of  rates  and  interruption  to  service. 

Competition  between  street  railways  is 
seldom  desirable,  for 

a.  Two  companies  can  hardly  oper- 

ate on  the  same  street. 

b.  With  competition  transfer  privi- 

leges cannot  be  liberal. 

c.  Traffic  is   liable  to   interruption, 

since 
i'.    With  competition  bankruptcy 
is  frequent. 


317 


Argument  and  Brief 

that  the  disadvantages  attendant  upon  the  operation 
of  a  bankrupt  or  financially  embarrassed  company 
will  tend  to  crop  up  with  considerable  frequency. 
Cleveland  has  been  giving  an  illustration,  for  some 
five  years,  of  the  practical  disadvantages  arising 
from  street-railway  competition  in  a  busy  city,  these 
disadvantages  including  tracks  torn  up  in  midnight 
warfare,  abolition  of  transfer  privileges  between 
competing  lines,  failure  to  run  through  services  to 
important  points,  such  as  railroad  stations,  and  the 
like. 

The  steam  railroads  have  given  ample  demonstra- 
tion that  nobody  gets  any  permanent  profit  from 
cut-throat  competition  between  them.  In  the  ten 
years  when  the  general  competition  in  this  country 
was  most  severe,  say  from  1870  to  1880,  the  shipper 
might  get  an  exceedingly  low  rate  on  a  competi- 
tive transaction,  but  was  quite  sure  to  get  an  exceed- 
ingly high  one  to  compensate  for  it  on  a  transaction 
in  non-competitive  territory.  At  all  events,  he  never 
knew  six  months,  or  even  one  month,  ahead,  what 
his  rate  was  going  to  be,  and  the  uncertainty  at- 
tendant upon  this  state  of  affairs  worked  a  great 
deal  of  harm  and  resulted  in  a  thousand  forms  of 
discrimination,  intentional  and  unintentional  on  the 
part  of  the  railroad.  Moreover,  the  lines  which  felt 
318 


Argument  and  Brief 


d.    Cleveland  affords  an  illustration 
of  the  disadvantages  of  compe- 
tition of  street  railways,  for 
i'.     Tracks  were  torn  up  in  mid- 
night warfare. 
2'.     Transfer     privileges      were 

abolished. 
3'.    Service  was  interrupted. 
The    steam    railroads    have    demon- 
strated that  nobody  gets  any  perma- 
nent profit  from  cut-throat  compe- 
tition, for 

a.  During    the    highly    competitive 

period  from  1870  to  1880,  rates 
were  exceedingly  low  in  com- 
petitive territory,  but  high  in 
non-competitive  territory. 

b.  Rates  fluctuated  widely. 


319 


Argument  and  Brief 

the  competition  most  were  in  wretched  physical  con- 
dition, and  were  unable  to  better  themselves.  This 
was  particularly  true  in  the  South.  Albert  Fink 
pointed  out  that,  in  the  rate  wars  prior  to  the  for- 
mation of  the  Southern  Railway  and  Steamship 
Association,  gross  earnings  of  the  southern  railroads 
were  reduced  about  42  per  cent,  below  what  regular 
rates  would  have  allowed;  an  amount  in  many 
cases  equal  to  the  whole  net  earnings  which  could 
have  been  derived  from  the  competitive  business  at 
the  regular  rates,  so  that  the  business  was  really  un- 
profitable, and  the  roads  were,  in  consequence,  prac- 
tically worthless  to  their  owners.  In  1876  a  com- 
mittee of  the  stockholders  of  the  Central  Railroad  & 
Banking  Company  of  Georgia  reported :  '"'  It  is  con- 
ceded that  the  property  of  your  stockholders  is  on 
the  brink  of  being  sunk  forever,  and  the  bankruptcy 
of  a  number  of  your  roads  is  imminent,  if  not  even 
now  a  fact."  Of  course,  roads  in  this  condition 
could  not  afford  to  make  their  facilities  better  or  to 
give  their  country  a  better  service  in  any  way. 
They  had  no  surplus  net  earnings  for  betterment 
work,  and  nobody  wanted  to  buy  their  securities. 
It  was  not  until  the  great  consolidations  like  the 
Southern  Railway,  the  Atlantic  Coast  Line,  and  the 
Seaboard  Air  Line  got  the  situation  well  in  hand 
320 


Argument  and  Brief 

c.     The  lines  that  felt  the  competi- 
tion   most    were    in    wretched 
physical  condition,  as 
i'.     Gross  earnings  of   southern 
roads  were  42  per  cent,  be- 
low   what    regular    rates 
would  have  allowed.     (Al- 
bert Fink.) 
2'.     They    had    no    surplus    net 
earnings     for     betterment 
work. 

d.  Southern     roads     were    on    the 

verge  of  bankruptcy.  (A  com- 
mittee of  the  stockholders  of 
the  Central  Railroad  &  Banking 
Company  of  Georgia,  1876.) 

e.  Consolidations  like  the  Southern 

Railway,  the  Atlantic  Coast 
Line,  and  the  Seaboard  Air 
Line  brought  good  service. 


321 


Argument  and  Brief 

that  the  South  began  to  have  a  decent  railroad 
service.  Prior  to  that  time,  the  best  and  strongest 
companies  always  had  to  compete  with  the  bank- 
rupts ;  a  process  which  does  no  good  to  a  well  com- 
pany or  a  sick  company,  or  to  the  territory  which 
either  of  them  serves. 

S.  W.  Dunning,  with  his  long  experience  as  a 
close  observer  and  critic  of  railroad  affairs,  used 
to  say  that  the  people  who  built  the  West  Shore 
Railroad  did  more  harm  and  caused  greater  destruc- 
tion of  property  than  they  w^ould  have  done  if  they 
had  gone  around  burning  barns  all  along  the  route ; 
and  this  simile  portrays  pretty  well  the  workings 
of  unrestricted  competition.  The  shipper  gets  a 
high  rate  one  day,  a  low  one  the  next,  and  confronts 
a  constant  tendency  on  the  part  of  the  hard-beset 
railroad  company  to  "  scamp  "  its  work ;  the  railroad 
company  w^orks  at  cost  in  one  locality  and  on  a 
basis  of  exorbitant  profit  in  another,  and  engages 
in  a  long  struggle  with  bankruptcy,  while  the  in- 
vestor realizes  that  he  has  made  a  mistake,  and  re- 
solves to  keep  out  of  such  enterprises  in  the  future, 
or  else  to  require  an  extremely  high  potential  return 
on  his  investment. 

This,  in  brief,  was  the  effect  upon  railroads  and 
upon  the  interests  they  served,  in  the  period  of 
322 


Argument  and  Brief 


f.  The  building  of  the  West  Shore 
Railroad  —  a  competitive  line 
—  did  great  harm.  (S.  W. 
Dunning.) 


g.     Investors  in  railroads  lost  money. 


323 


Argument  and  Brief 

maximum  free  competition.  The  particular  harm- 
fulness  of  this  kind  of  competition  to  railroads 
arises  from  the  fact  that  the  capital  invested  in  them 
must  perform  its  work  just  where  it  is,  no  matter 
how  great  the  disadvantages,  so  that  the  bankrupt 
that  has  given  up  trying  to  pay  fixed  charges  has 
powers  of  harmfulness  almost  unlimited.  It  is 
surely  to  our  discredit  as  an  intelligent  people  that 
we  should  try  to  maintain  this  kind  of  free  competi- 
tion by  law ! 

It  should  not  be  inferred  from  this  argument  that 
the  writer  believes  that  railroads  and  industrial  com- 
binations should  be  free  of  regulation  in  the  public 
interest.  Certain  police  powers  are  just  as  neces- 
sary to  the  national  government  as  they  are  to  a 
municipal  government;  certain  kinds  of  corporate 
conduct,  such  as  the  practice  of  giving  rebates  to 
favored  shippers,  may  certainly  be  determined  to 
be  contrary  to  public  policy  without  violation  of 
economic  laws.  But  the  attempt  to  confer  a  public 
benefit  by  requiring  universal  competition  in  place 
of  consolidation  is  just  as  absurd  in  theory  as  it  is 
unattainable  in  practice. 


324 


Argument  and  Brief 


The  evils  arising  from  railroad  and  in- 
dustrial combinations  may  be  removed 
by  government  regulation 


CONCLUSION 


I.  The  attempt  to  confer  a  public  benefit  by  re- 
quiring universal  competition  in  place  of 
consolidation  is  just  as  absurd  in  theory  as 
it  is  unattainable  in  practice. 


325 


APPENDIX  B 
PARLIAMENTARY  PROCEEDINGS 

Many  teachers  have  found  that  debate  can  best  be 
taught  by  turning  the  class  into  a  parhamentary 
body,  with  a  student  as  chairman  and  the  instructor 
as  critic.  In  preparation  for  a  formal  debate  the 
contestants  should  always  submit  briefs  of  their 
arguments  to  the  instructor  a  sufficient  length  of 
time  beforehand  so  that  he  may  criticize  them  and, 
if  necessary,  revise  them.  On  the  day  of  the  con- 
test interest  will  be  added  if  judges  are  appointed 
or  elected  and  a  decision  is  given  near  the  close 
of  the  exercise.  As  soon  as  the  scheduled  debaters 
have  finished  both  their  main  speeches  and  argu- 
ments in  rebuttal,  the  question  under  consideration 
comes  before  the  house  for  discussion,  for  amend- 
ment, or  for  whatever  the  organization  sees  fit  to 
do  with  it. 

The  speeches  that  are  made  at  this  time  may  or 
may  not  be  fully  prepared  beforehand ;  they  should 
seldom  be  impromptu.  Most  decidedly  they  ought 
326 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

not  to  be  mere  repetition  of  what  has  already  been 
said.  Some  teachers  consider  it  best  to  have  the 
students  speak  from  the  house  according  to  a  fixed 
schedule;  others,  preferring  that  considerable  lati- 
tude in  the  choice  of  subjects  be  allowed,  merely  re- 
quire each  student  to  make  during  the  term  a  cer- 
tain number  of  floor  speeches  of  a  stated  length. 

Since  few  students  are  familiar  with  parliamen- 
tary practice,  the  following  table  showing  what  mo- 
tions are  possible  and  when  they  may  be  made  will 
be  found  useful.  Each  motion  in  the  list  gives  way 
to  the  motion  that  follows  it.  For  example,  if  the 
main  motion  is  to  purchase  a  copy  of  Cushing's 
Manual,  it  is  perfectly  proper  for  the  chairman  at 
any  time  during  the  debate  to  entertain  the  motion 
to  refer  the  matter  to  a  committee.  While  this  is 
being  debated,  he  could  not  properly  entertain  the 
motion  to  postpone  the  matter  indefinitely ;  since  that 
motion,  as  the  table  shows,  precedes  the  motion  to 
refer  to  a  committee.  Any  following  motion,  how- 
ever, such  as  to  take  a  recess,  would  be  in  order, 
and  this  last  motion  must  be  voted  on  before  the 
motion  to  refer  to  a  committee  is  put  to  the  house. 
If  the  motion  to  take  a  recess  is  lost,  then  the  mo- 
tion to  refer  the  question  to  a  committee  must  be 
voted  on  before  the  main  motion. 
327 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 


PARLIAMENTARY  MOTIONS. 

1.  '^  Main  Motion 

2.  (a)    '-'Motion  to  Amend ^ 

(b)  Motion  to  Amend  an  Amendment^ 

(c)  Motion  to  Postpone  Indefinitely  ^ 

3.  *  Motion  to  Refer  to  a  Committee 

4.  *  Motion  to  Postpone    to    a    Definite 

Time 

5.  t "  The  Previous  Question  " 

6.  Motion  to  Lay  on  the  Table 

7.  t  Motion  to  Suspend  the  Rules 

8.  Motion  to  Withdraw  a  Motion 

9.  *  Motion  to  Divide  a  Question 

10.  Motion  to  Read  Papers 

11.  fThe  Objection 

12.  Appeal 

13.  Point  of  Order 

14.  Call  for  ''  the  Order  of  the  Day  " 

15.  *  Questions  of  Privilege 

16.  Motion  to  Take  a  Recess 

17.  Motion  to  Adjourn 

18.  Motion  to  Adjourn  to  Meet  at  a  Cer- 

tain Time  and  Place 
Only  motions  printed  in  heavy  type  are  debat- 
able;   those    marked    with    an    asterisk    may    be 
amended;  those  marked  with  a  dagger  require  a 
two-thirds  vote. 

1  The  motion  to  amend  an  amendment  takes  precedence  over  a 
motion  to  amend;  each  of  these  two  motions  is  of  the  same  value 
as  the  motion  to  postpone  indefinitely  and  may  neither  supersede  it 
nor  be  superseded  by  it. 

328 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

1.  Main  motion.  In  parliamentary  assemblies 
policies  are  discussed  and  business  is  transacted  by- 
means  of  motions.  A  motion  may  be  made  by  a 
member  of  the  body  only  after  he  has  risen  and 
has  been  recognized  by  the  presiding  officer.  The 
motion  should  be  stated  in  this  form:  "  Mr.  Chair- 
man, I  move  that  we  elect  a  board  of  judges  for 
the  scheduled  debate."  If  this  motion  is  seconded, 
the  presiding  officer  announces  it  to  the  house  thus : 
"  It  has  been  moved  and  seconded  that  we  elect  a 
board  of  judges  for  the  scheduled  debate.  Is  there 
any  discussion?  If  there  is  no  discussion  [or  no 
further  discussion],  are  you  ready  for  the  ques- 
tion ? "  This  original  motion  is  called  the  main 
motion.  Until  this  main  motion  has  been  disposed 
of,  no  other  main  motion  may  be  introduced. 

2.  (a)  Motion  to  amend.  If  any  member  of 
the  assembly  wishes  the  main  motion  changed  be- 
fore it  comes  to  a  vote,  he  has  the  privilege  of  mov- 
ing to  amend  the  motion  by  adding  to  it,  by  taking 
away  from  it,  or  by  changing  the  wording  of  the 
motion.  For  example,  one  might  move  to  insert 
the  word  "three"  before  "judges"  in  the  motion 
mentioned  in  the  preceding  paragraph.  If  this  mo- 
tion to  amend  is  seconded,  the  amendment  must  be 
voted  on  before  the  main  motion  is  put.     As  many 

329 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

amendments  to  a  main  motion  may  be  made  as  are 
desired,  but  each  one  must  be  disposed  of  as  it  rises 
before  another  can  be  offered. 

(b)  Motion  to  amend  an  amendment.  An 
amendment  may  be  amended  also.  The  motion 
mentioned  in  the  preceding  paragraphs  will  furnish 
an  illustration.  After  it  has  been  moved  that  the 
original  motion  be  amended  by  the  insertion  of  the 
word  "  three/'  it  would  be  proper  for  a  member  to 
move  that  the  word  "  three  "  be  changed  to  "  five." 
This  motion  would  be  an  amendment  to  an  amend- 
ment. In  order  that  there  may  be  no  such  piling 
up  of  amendments  on  top  of  amendments  as  would 
cause  confusion  and  make  the  transaction  of  busi- 
ness almost  impossible,  there  cannot  be  an  amend- 
ment of  an  amendment  to  an  amendment.  Stated 
more  clearly,  the  rule  is  this:  Only  two  amend- 
ments may  be  pending  at  any  given  time,  one 
amending  the  original  motion,  and  one  amendment 
to  this  amendment.  It  is  always  necessary  to  vote 
upon  an  amendment  to  an  amendment  before  vot- 
ing upon  the  original  amendment. 

(c)  Motion  to  postpone  indefinitely.  The  mo- 
tion to  postpone  indefinitely  is  of  the  same  value 
as  the  motion  to  amend  and  the  motion  to  amend  an 
amendment,  and  when  either  of  these  two  latter  is 

330 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

before  the  house,  the  motion  to  postpone  indefinitely 
cannot  be  made  since  it  has  no  higher  value.  For 
the  same  reason  when  the  motion  to  postpone  in- 
definitely is  before  the  house,  neither  the  motion  to 
amend  nor  the  motion  to  amend  an  amendment  can 
be  made.  If  the  motion  to  postpone  indefinitely  is 
passed,  the  original  motion  is  cast  out  and  can  come 
up  only  at  a  subsequent  meeting,  and  then  only  as 
new  business. 

3.  Motion  to  refer  to  a  committee.  Commit- 
tees greatly  facilitate  the  work  of  deliberative  bod- 
ies. If  discussion  is  taking  place  concerning  a 
main  motion,  an  amendment,  an  amendment  to  an 
amendment,  or  a  motion  to  postpone  indefinitely,  it 
is  proper  to  move  that  the  question  under  consid- 
eration be  referred  to  a  committee  —  a  standing 
committee  or  a  committee  to  be  appointed  or 
elected.  The  committee  may  or  may  not  be  in- 
structed when  to  bring  in  a  report.  Should  no  in- 
structions be  given,  the  report  of  a  committee  may 
be  presented  to  the  assembly  at  any  suitable  time 
provided  that  no  one  objects.  When  objections 
arise,  a  motion  to  hear  the  report  is  in  order.  If 
the  report  contains  only  information,  the  usual  pro- 
cedure is  to  pass  a  motion  accepting  the  report;  if 
it  recommends  certain  lines  of  action,  it  is  customary 

331 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

for  some  one  to  move  that  the  report  be  accepted 
and  adopted.  The  acceptance  of  the  report  dis- 
solves the  committee,  unless  it  is  a  standing  com- 
mittee. The  adoption  of  the  report  binds  the  as- 
sembly to  the  action  recommended. 

4.  Motion  to  postpone  to  a  definite  time.  The 
motion  to  postpone  to  a  definite  time  can  be  made 
in  reference  only  to  a  main  motion,  together  with 
its  amendments  if  there  are  any;  it  cannot  refer 
merely  to  an  amendment  separate  from  the  prin- 
cipal motion.  If  the  motion  to  postpone  the  con- 
sideration of  a  question  to  a  definite  time  is  passed, 
this  question  can  be  taken  up  sooner  only  by  a  two- 
thirds  vote.  If  the  consideration  of  the  question 
has  been  postponed  to  a  certain  hour,  the  question 
takes  precedence  at  that  time  over  everything  ex- 
cept matters  of  privilege.  If  the  postponement  has 
been  made  to  a  certain  day  merely,  the  question 
comes  up  on  that  day  as  unfinished  business. 

5.  "  The  previous  question."  To  move  the  pre- 
vious question  is  to  make  a  motion  which,  if 
passed,  will  stop  debate  and  bring  the  original  mo- 
tion to  a  vote.  That  this  procedure  should  be 
called  by  the  technical  name  "  moving  the  previous 
question  "  is  unfortunate,  because  this  phrase  often 

Z2>^ 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

confuses  men  unskilled  in  parliamentary  law.  For 
one  to  say,  '*  I  move  the  previous  question,"  is 
equivalent  to  saying,  *'  I  move  that  debate  about  the 
motion  before  the  house  cease,  and  a  vote  be  taken." 
If  there  are  several  motions  before  the  house  when 
the  previous  question  is  passed,  such  as  a  main  mo- 
tion and  a  motion  to  amend,  there  can  be  no  more 
debate  about  any  of  them;  a  vote  on  each  must  be 
taken  at  once  in  the  proper  order.  The  only  ex- 
ception to  this  rule  occurs  when  a  committee  has 
made  a  report.  Then  that  member  of  the  commit- 
tee who  has  given  the  report  may  close  the  debate 
on  the  adoption  of  the  report  even  after  the  previ- 
ous question  has  been  passed.  At  all  other  times 
if  the  previous  question  is  passed,  all  debate  ceases; 
if  the  previous  question  fails  to  pass,  the  business  be- 
fore the  house  is  in  the  same  condition  as  though 
the  previous  question  had  never  been  moved. 

6.  Motion  to  lay  on  the  table.  Whenever  an 
assembly  wishes  to  delay  action  on  a  measure  until 
more  information  can  be  gathered,  more  thought 
taken,  or  more  important  business  transacted,  it 
usually  passes  a  motion  to  lay  the  question  under 
consideration  on  the  table.  A  majority  vote  may 
call  up  the  question  again  at  any  time.  The  true 
333 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

function  of  this  motion  is  to  aid  a  measure  by  de- 
ferring the  vote  until  a  more  favorable  time.  It 
differs  from  the  motion  to  postpone  indefinitely  in 
that  the  question  indefinitely  postponed  cannot  be 
brought  up  again  at  the  same  session.  A  main  mo- 
tion cannot  be  separated  from  its  amendments,  and 
the  tabling  of  one  means  the  tabling  of  all.  If  other 
motions  are  pending,  such  as  a  motion  to  refer  to 
a  committee,  they  are  lost. 

7.  Motion  to  suspend  the  rules.  Most  organ- 
izations have  by-laws  prescribing  the  order  in 
which  business  shall  be  transacted.  Usually  these 
by-laws  also  provide  that  a  two-thirds  vote  shall 
be  competent  in  a  particular  case  to  set  aside  the 
regular  order  temporarily,  and  to  permit  a  measure 
to  come  up  out  of  its  turn.  If  no  such  by-law  ex- 
ists, the  rules  cannot  properly  be  suspended  except 
by  common  consent.  A  motion  to  suspend  the 
rules  never  applies  to  established  parliamentary 
principles. 

8.  Motion  to  vvithdraw  a  motion.  If  no  one  ob- 
jects, the  mover  of  a  motion  may  withdraw  it  at 
any  time  before  it  has  been  passed.  As  a  matter 
of  courtesy  special  permission  is  usually  asked  of 
the  seconder  of  the  motion.  If  objection  is  made, 
a  motion  to  withdraw  is  in  order.     After  a  motion 

334 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

has  been  withdrawn,  business  is  resumed  as  though 
the  motion  had  never  been  made. 

g.  Motion  to  "  divide  the  question."  When  a 
motion  contains  two  or  more  propositions,  it  is  fre- 
quentty  desirable  to  divide  it  so  that  each  proposi- 
tion may  be  voted  on  separately.  If  a  motion  to 
divide  the  question  is  passed,  the  propositions  are 
debated  and  voted  on  in  the  order  in  which  they 
occur. 

10.  Motion  to  read  papers.  If  no  protest  is 
made  when  a  member  asks  permission  to  read 
papers  or  reports,  or  to  have  them  read,  a  motion 
is  unnecessary.  If  objection  does  arise,  however, 
a  motion  may  be  resorted  to.  Leave  is  usually 
granted  unless  the  reading  is  manifestly  for  the  pur- 
pose of  delay. 

11.  The  objection.  If  any  member  —  even  the 
chairman  —  thinks  that  a  motion  is  for  some  rea- 
son objectionable  and  should  not  be  discussed,  he 
is  privileged  as  soon  as  the  motion  is  stated,  but 
not  later,  to  object  to  the  consideration  of  the  ques- 
tion. No  second  is  necessar}^  No  debate  can  en- 
sue. The  chairman  must  at  once  say,  "  Objection 
has  been  made  to  the  consideration  of  this  ques- 
tion. All  those  in  favor  of  discussing  this  question 
will  vote  in  the  affirmative.     Those  opposed  to  the 

335 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

discussion  of  this  question  will  vote  in  the  nega- 
tive." It  will  be  noted  tlmt  a  negative  vote  sus- 
tains the  objection. 

12.  Appeal.  Whenever  a  member  believes  that 
the  chairman  has  made  a  wrong  decision,  he  may 
say,  "  Mr.  Chairman,  I  appeal  from  the  decision 
of  the  chair."  If  the  appeal  is  seconded,  it  con- 
stitutes a  motion  and  is  debatable.  At  the  close  of 
the  debate  the  chairman  puts  the  motion  thus: 
"  Those  who  wish  to  support  the  decision  of  the 
chair  will  vote  in  the  affirmative.  Those  who  op- 
pose the  decision  of  the  chair  will  vote  in  the  nega- 
tive." The  chainnan  is  permitted  to  vote  even 
though  there  be  no  tie.  A  majority  vote  is  neces- 
sary to  reverse  the  chair's  decision.  The  decision 
of  the  assembly  must  be  obeyed  whether  it  cor- 
responds to  parliamentary  law  or  not. 

13.  Point  of  order.  Should  anything  improper 
occur,  such  as  the  use  of  objectionable  language, 
disorder  on  the  part  of  any  one,  or  some  violation 
of  parliamentary  law,  the  presiding  officer  ought  to 
exercise  his  authority  to  enforce  order,  propriety, 
and  correct  parliamentary  procedure.  If  he  does 
not,  a  member  may  stand,  regardless  of  who  has 
the  floor,  and  say,  "  Mr.  Chairman,  I  rise  to  a  point 
of  order."     No  second  is  needed.     The  chairman 

336 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

will  ask  him  to  state  his  point,  and  will  then  rule 
as  to  whether  any  departure  from  propriety  or  par- 
liamentary order  has  occurred  or  is  occurring.  If 
the  chairman  is  in  doubt,  he  may  ask  the  assembly 
to  decide  the  question.  Any  one  who  disagrees 
with  the  ruling  of  the  chair  has  the  right  to  ap- 
peal. 

14.  Call  for  "  the  order  of  the  day."  If  an  or- 
ganization votes  to  adopt  a  certain  program  at  a 
certain  time,  or  to  postpone  a  question  to  a  certain 
hour,  then  when  that  time  arrives,  in  spite  of  other 
business  that  may  be  before  the  house  and  even 
though  another  member  has  the  floor,  a  member 
may  address  the  chair  and  call  for  the  order  of 
the  day.  This  motion  requires  no  second.  The 
chairman  must  immediately  put  the  question, 
"  Shall  we  proceed  to  take  up  the  order  of  the  day? 
All  in  favor  will  vote  aye.  All  opposed  will  vote 
no."  If  this  motion  is  passed,  the  business  that 
constituted  the  order  of  the  day  comes  before  the 
house  without  an  additional  motion. 

15.  Questions  of  privilege.  Questions  of  priv- 
ilege spring  from  matters  that  affect  the  efficiency 
of  an  organization  and  the  rights  and  the  comfort 
of  its  members.  Such  questions  may  be  brought 
up  at  any  moment  and  introduced  as  follows : 

337 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

Member :  "  Mr.  President,  I  rise  to  a  question 
of  privilege." 

Chair :     "  State  your  question." 

Member :  "  A  person  not  belonging  to  this  or- 
ganization is  in  the  hall  and  is  voting.  I  suggest 
that  we  suspend  business  until  he  leaves." 

Chair:  "If  there  is  no  objection,  business  will 
be  suspended  until  the  person  who  is  not  a  member 
of  this  body  leaves  the  hall." 

Should  an  objection  be  raised,  the  question  be- 
comes a  motion,  and  the  chairman  says,  "  Shall  we 
suspend  business  until  the  person  mentioned  has 
left  the  hall?" 

Question  of  privilege  may  be  amended,  referred 
to  a  committee,  postponed,  or  laid  on  the  table; 
they  are  also  subject  to  *'  the  previous  question." 

1 6.  Motion  to  take  a  recess.  A  motion  to  take 
a  recess  may  be  made  when  other  business  is  pend- 
ing; it  cannot  be  debated  or  amended  under  such 
circumstances.  At  other  times  it  may  be  treated  as 
a  main  motion.  If  the  motion  fixes  no  definite 
time,  it  is  understood  that  the  meeting  will  be  re- 
sumed at  the  discretion  of  the  chair.  After  a  re- 
cess business  proceeds  as  though  there  had  been 
no  interruption. 

17.  Motion  to  adjourn.     The  motion  to  adjourn 

338 


Parliamentary  Proceedings 

may  be  made  at  any  time  except  when  the  chair- 
man or  some  other  member  is  speaking,  when  vot- 
ing is  in  progress,  or  when  a  vote  is  being  verified. 
Even  though  this  motion  does  not  fix  the  time  and 
the  place  of  the  next  meeting,  it  may  not  be 
amended.  If,  however,  before  the  motion  to  ad- 
journ has  been  passed  and  adjournment  declared, 
it  seems  necessar}^  to  fix  the  time  and  the  place  of 
the  next  meeting,  then  the  simple  motion  to  ad- 
journ gives  way  to  a  new  motion  of  greater  priv- 
ilege that  will  correct  this  fault.  This  motion  of 
higher  value  is  discussed  in  the  following  para- 
graph. 

1 8.  Motion  to  adjourn  to  meet  at  a  certain  time 
and  place.  If  a  motion  to  adjourn  to  meet  at  a 
certain  time  and  place  is  made  when  no  other  busi- 
ness is  pending,  it  may  be  treated  as  a  main  mo- 
tion, and  as  such  it  may  be  debated,  amended,  or 
divided.  If,  however,  other  business  is  before  the 
house,  such  a  motion  takes  precedence  over  all  other 
motions  and  must  be  disposed  of  at  once. 


339 


APPENDIX  C 
A    LIST    OF   PROPOSITIONS 

1.  The  United  States  should  take  the  initiative 
in  forming  a  federation  of  all  American  Republics 
for  the  purpose  of  settling  such  disputes  as 
threaten  to  disturb  international  relations  in  the 
Western  Hemisphere. 

2.  The  United  States  should  adopt  the  "  budget 
system  "  as  a  method  of  determining  national  ap- 
propriations. 

3.  The  Federal  government  should  appoint  a 
commission  to  determine  the  price  of  foodstuffs. 

4.  Italy  was  justified  in  withdrawing  from  the 
Triple  Alliance. 

5.  Germany's  entrance  into  Belgium  was  justi- 
fiable. 

6.  The  United  States  should  acquire  and  operate 
ships  as  a  means  of  increasing  our  merchant  ma- 
rine. 

7.  The  United  States  should  maintain  a  system 

340 


A  List  of  Propositions 

of  subsidies  for  the  protection  of  American  mer- 
chant marine. 

8.  The  Federal  government  should  exempt  Amer- 
ican ships  engaged  in  coastwise  trade  from  paying 
Panama  Canal  tolls. 

9.  Congress  should  repeal  the  Sherman  Law. 

10.  Congress  should  repeal  the  Fifteenth  Amend- 
ment. 

11.  The  United  States  should  abandon  her  gen- 
eral fixed  policy  of  neutrality  in  world  affairs. 

12.  Neutral  nations  should  refuse  to  sell  arms  to 
belligerent  nations. 

13.  Presidents  of  the  United  States  should  be 
nominated  by  the  direct  primary. 

14.  The  President  of  the  United  States  should  be 
elected  by  direct  vote  of  the  people. 

15.  The  President  of  the  United  States  should 
be  elected  for  a  term  of  six  years  and  be  ineligible 
for  reelection. 

16.  The  United  States  should  build  at  least  four 
superdreadnaughts  a  year. 

17.  The  standing  army  of  the  United  States 
should  be  increased  to  five  hundred  thousand  men. 

18.  The  United  States  army  should  be  strength- 
ened by  the  establishment  of  a  military  reserve  of 
at  least  one  million  men. 

341 


A  List  of  Propositions 

19.  As  a  part  of  the  military  and  naval  equip- 
ment of  the  United  States  there  should  immediately 
be  a  large  increase  in  the  number  of  air  craft. 

20.  The  United  States  should  abandon  the  IMon- 
roe  Doctrine. 

21.  The  United  States  should  grant  full  citizen- 
ship to  the  people  of  Porto  Rico. 

22.  The  annexation  of  Cuba  to  the  United  States 
would  be  for  the  best  interests  of  Cuba. 

23.  Political  union  with  Cuba  would  be  for  the 
best  interests  of  the  United  States. 

24.  The  United  States  should  permanently  retain 
the  Philippines. 

25.  The  United  States  should  immediately  give 
the  Philippines  their  independence. 

26.  The  Federal  government  should  acquire  and 
operate  the  coal  mines  in  the  United  States. 

2^.  The  Federal  government  should  acquire  and 
operate  the  interstate  railroads  in  the  United  States. 

28.  The  Federal  government  should  acquire  and 
operate  all  interstate  telephone  and  telegraph  sys- 
tems in  the  United  States. 

29.  The  United  States  should  discontinue  the  pro- 
tective tariff  policy. 

30.  Letter  postage  should  be  reduced  to  one  cent 
an  ounce  or  fraction  thereof. 

342 


A  List  of  Propositions 

31.  Corporations  engaged  in  interstate  com- 
merce should  be  required  to  take  out  a  Federal  li- 
cense. 

32.  American  municipalities  should  own  and  op- 
erate their  street  car  systems. 

33.  In  the  State  of ,  all  cities  having  at  least 

ten   thousand   inhabitants    should    adopt    the    Des 
Moines  system  of  government. 

34.  A  State  constabulary  should  be  established 
in  . 

35.  The  recall  of  State  and  local  judges  by  pop- 
ular vote  is  desirable. 

36.  Federal  judges  should  be  elected  by  popular 
vote. 

37.  Justices  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court 
should  be  elected  by  popular  vote. 

38.  The  right  of  suffrage  should  be  limited  in  the 
State  of by  an  educational  test. 

39.  Immigration  to  the  United  States  should  be 
further  restricted  by  an  educational  test. 

40.  The  State  of should  adopt  the:  initiative 

and  referendum  system  of  government. 

41.  Japanese  control  will  be  of  greater  benefit  to 
China  than  Russian  control. 

42.  Free  trade  should  be  established  between  tUe 
United  States  and  the  Philippines. 

343 


A  List  of  Propositions 

43.  The  Chinese  should,  be  excluded   from  the 
Philippines. 

44.  The  present  laws  relating  to  Chinese  immi- 
gration should  be  amended  to  include  the  Japanese. 

45.  The  United  States  should  admit  the  Chinese 
on  equal  terms  with  other  immigrants. 

46.  The  United  States  should  admit  all  raw  ma- 
terials free  of  duty. 

47.  Postmasters  should  be  elected  by  popular  vote. 

48.  The   date   of   the   Presidential   inauguration 
should  be  changed. 

49.  Labor  unions  are  detrimental  to  the  best  in- 
terests of  the  w^orking  man. 

50.  Employers  are  justified  in  refusing  to  recog- 
nize labor  unions. 

51.  Members  of  trade  unions  are  justified  in  re- 
fusing to  work  with  non-union  men. 

52.  The  boycott  is  morally  justifiable. 

53.  Convicts  should  not  be  farmed  out  to  private 
contractors. 

54.  The  products  of  prison  labor  should  not  be 
allowed  to  compete  in  the  open  market. 

55.  The  State  of should  abolish  the  death 

penalt}% 

56.  The  United  States  government  is  treating  the 
Indians  unjustly. 

344 


A  List  of  Propositions 

57.  In  all  criminal  cases  three-fourths  of  a  jury 
should  be  competent  to  render  a  verdict. 

58.  The  establishment  of  moving  picture  houses 
has  been  a  detriment  to  the  United  States. 

59.  The  present  powers  of  courts  to  grant  injunc- 
tions should  be  greatly  curtailed. 

60.  The  United  States  should  establish  an  old- 
age  pension  system  similar  to  the  one  in  operation 
in  England. 

61.  The  white  citizens  in  the  Southern  States  are 
justified  in  maintaining  their  political  supremacy. 

62.  Railroad  pooling  should  be  legalized. 

63.  Congress  should  restore  the  canteen  to  the 
United  States  army. 

64.  Steel  should  be  admitted  into  the  United 
States  free  of  duty. 

65.  The  plea  of  insanity  should  not  be  available 
as  a  bar  to  punishment  for  crime. 

66.  The  progress  and  prosperity  of  the  United 
States  would  be  increased  if  the  right  of  suffrage 
were  not  denied  any  one  solely  on  account  of  sex. 

67.  The  Supreme  Court  should  be  deprived  of  the 
power  to  declare  statutes  of  Congress  unconstitu- 
tional. 

68.  All  counties  in should  adopt  a  commis- 
sion form  of  government. 

345 


A  List  of  Propositions 

6g.  The  establishment  of  large  foundations,  such 
as  the  Carnegie  and  Rockefeller  foundations,  is 
contrary  to  the  best  interests  of  the  United 
States. 

70.  The  Legislature  should  grant  no  ap- 
propriation to  private  institutions. 

71.  There  should  be  national  laws  governing 
marriage  and  divorce. 

^2.  The  short  ballot  should  be  used  in  State  and 
municipal  elections. 

y^.  High  license  is  preferable  to  prohibition. 

74.  Local  option  is  the  proper  solution  of  the  liq- 
uor problem. 

75.  State  boards  of  arbitration,  with  compulsory- 
powers,  should  be  appointed  to  settle  disputes  be- 
tween employers  and  employees. 

76.  Military  tactics  should  be  taught  in  the  pub- 
lic schools. 

yy.  Secret  societies  are  a  detriment  to  public 
schools. 

'^8.  No  prizes  should  be  offered  in  public 
schools. 

79.  The  practice  of  furnishing  free  text-books  to 
pupils  in  public  schools  should  be  abolished. 

80.  American  colleges  should  admit  students  only 
on  examination. 

346 


A  List  of  Propositions 

8i.  The  education  of  the  American  negro  should 
be  industrial  rather  than  liberal. 

82.  For  the  average  student  the  small  college  is 
preferable  to  the  large  college. 

83.  The  three-term  system  is  preferable  to  the 
semester  system  at College. 

84.  In  colleges  and  universities  the  lecture  system 
of  teaching  economics  is  superior  to  the  recitation 
system. 

85.  Degrees  should  be  granted  twice  a  year  at 
College. 

86.  Compulsory  chapel  attendance  should  be  abol- 
ished at College. 

87.  Greek-letter  fraternities  are  a  detriment  to 
American  colleges. 

88.  Education  in  all  States  should  be  compul- 
sory to  the  age  of  sixteen. 

89.  College  students  receiving  an  average  daily 
grade  of  eighty-five  per  cent,  in  a  subject  should 
be  excused  from  final  examination  in  that  sub- 
ject. 

90.  Class  rushes  should  be  abolished  at Col- 
lege. 

91.  All  colleges  should  abolish  hazing. 

92.  Freshmen  should  not  be  debarred  from  inter- 
collegiate athletic  contests. 

347 


A  List  of  Propositions 

93.  Athletics,  as  conducted  at  present,  are  detri- 
mental to College. 

94.  A  large  city  aifords  a  better  location  for  a 
college  than  does  the  country. 

95.  The  honor  system  of  holding  examinations 
should  be  adopted  at College. 

96.  American  universities  should  admit  women 
on  equal  terms  with  men. 

97.  The Legislature  should  refuse  State  aid 

to  all  colleges  maintaining  Greek-letter  fraternities. 

98.  The  organization  of  sororities  at College 

would  be  for  the  best  interests  of  all  concerned. 

99.  Intercollegiate  football  contests  should  be  lim- 
ited to  one  game. 

100.  All     American     colleges     and     universities 
should  abolish  the  paid  athletic  coach. 


348 


ADDITIONAL  PROPOSITIONS 


349 


Additional  Propositions 


350 


Additional  Propositions 


351 


INDEX 


Admissions  against  interest, 

121. 

Affirmative,    work    of,    241, 

246. 
Ambiguous  terms,  205. 
Amplify  and  diminish,  250. 
Analogy,  149. 
Analysis  of  proposition,  48. 

As   an   aid  in   refutation, 
191. 
Answering  one's  self,  192. 
Antecedent  probability,  136. 

Tests  for,  139,  140. 
Arguer,  qualifications  of  an, 

9- 
Arguing  in  a  circle,  204. 
Argument  and  its  brief,  29c. 
Argumentation,       definition 

of,  3- 
Purpose  of,  3. 
Field  of,  4. 
Benefits  of,  5. 
An  art,  6. 
Aims  of,  7. 

Twofold  nature  of,  7. 
Argumentum   ad   hominem, 

214. 
Argumentum    ad    populum, 

215. 


Assertiveness,  102. 
Audience,  definition  of,  31. 
Authority,  124, 

Begging  the  question,  201. 
Brief-drawing,  rules  for,  86, 

167,  171. 
Briefs,  model,  93,  172,  291. 
Burden  of  proof,  19. 

Composition    and    division, 

212. 
Conciliation,  30. 
Conclusion,  278. 

Errors  in,  284. 
Concreteness,  256. 
Connectives     in     a     brief, 

165. 
Conviction,  definition  of,  7. 

In  introduction,  48. 

In  discussion,  102. 

In  conclusion,  279. 

Debate,  definition  of,  3. 

Suggestions  for,  228. 

Special  features  of,  252. 

How  to  judge,  276. 
Deduction,  131. 
Definition,  48. 


353 


Index 


Definition,  by  authority,  49. 

By  illustration,  51. 
Delivery,  261. 

Position,  262. 

Gestures,  2^^, 

Voice,  270. 

Attitude     toward     oppo- 
nents, 274. 
Dilemma,  219. 
Discussion,  102. 

Enthymeme,  133. 
Evidence,    classification    of, 
105. 

Sources  of,  106. 

Tests  of,  108,  116. 

Negative,  122, 

Of  silence,  122. 

Against  interest,  121. 
Example,  145. 
Explanation  of  proposition, 

Fairness  as  means  of  con- 
ciliation, 34. 
Fallacies,  200. 

Begging  the  question,  201. 

Ambiguous  terms,  205. 

False  cause,  207. 

Composition  and  division, 
212. 

Ignoring  the  question,  213. 
False  cause,  207. 
Figures  of  speech,  259. 

Generalization,  145. 


Gestures,  267. 

Ignoring  the  question,  213. 
Indentation  in  brief,  90. 
Indexes  for  reference,  78. 
Induction,  128. 
Introduction,  work  of,  30. 

Persuasion  in,  30. 

Conviction  in,  48. 

Brief  of,  84. 
Issues,  how  to  find,  58. 

Tests  for,  72. 

Modesty  as  means  of  con- 
ciliation, 33. 

Negative  evidence,  122. 
Negative,  work  of,  244,  246. 

Partition,  75. 

Persuasion,  definition  of,  7. 

In  introduction,  30. 

In  discussion,  153. 

In  conclusion,  279. 
Post  hoc  ergo  propter  hoc, 

208. 
Preliminary  reading,  78. 
Proof,  definition  of,  103. 

Necessity  for,  102. 
Proposition,     definition     of, 
14. 

How  to  word,  18. 

Of  fact,  20. 

Of  policy,  20. 

With  only  one  side,  22. 

Ambiguous,  23. 


354 


Index 


Proposition,  too  general,  24. 

Combined,  25. 
Propositions,  list  of,  340. 

Qualifying  conclusion,  286. 
Quotations  in  a  brief,  89. 

Reasoning,  127. 

Inductive,  128. 

Deductive,  131. 

From    antecedent    proba- 
bility, 136. 

From  sign,  141. 

From  example,  145. 
Rebuttal  speeches,  248. 
Reductio  ad  ahsurdum,  216. 
Refutation,  190. 

Special  methods  of,  216. 

Arrangement  of  material 
for,  238. 


Sign,  141. 

Tests  for,  142. 
Sincerity  as  a  means  of  con- 
ciliation, 35. 
Statistics,  253. 
Subject,  importance  of,  36. 

Timeliness  of,  38. 
Subjects  suitable  for  argu- 
ment, 14. 
Syllogism,  132. 
Symbols,  use  of  in  brief,  91. 

Term,  definition  of,  14, 

Unity,  252. 

Variety,  252. 

What  each  debater  must  do, 
241. 


3SS 


TViic   Viriftlr   ic    TkTTT! 


in.r:T 


Ai 


jun 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

305  De  Neve  Drive  -  Parking  Lot  17  .  Box  951388 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALiFORNIA  90095-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library  from  which  It  was  borrowed. 


APR  14  2008 


DEC 
APR  2 

MAY  1 

.iiii":  of 

Form  ] 


I 


AA    000  410  503    7 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA-LOS  ANGELES 


L  007  772  708  9 


